California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Olgin, 130 Cal.App.3d 184, 181 Cal.Rptr. 563 (Cal. App. 1982):
The People apparently cite People v. Martinez (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 851, 167 Cal.Rptr. 477, for the proposition that it is not necessary that an accused be advised of his right to confrontation before admitting a prior felony conviction. In Martinez, the court stated: "It is contended that, because defendant was not expressly advised that he had a right to cross-examine witnesses as to the priors, his admission was invalid under In re Yurko (1974) 10 Cal.3d 857, 112 Cal.Rptr. 513, 519 P.2d 561 ... We cannot read Yurko as imposing such a requirement. That opinion directed its attention to the need to advise a defendant of the important consequences of a finding of priors; it nowhere expressly refers to an advisement of any right of cross-examination." (At p. 856, 112 Cal.Rptr. 513, 519 P.2d 561.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.