What is the effect of instructing the jury on alleged prior convictions?

We do not doubt that had the court properly understood that appellant did not intend to testify, it would have bifurcated the trial in the first instance and would not have instructed the jury regarding the alleged prior convictions. However, we also agree with respondent that any purported error by the trial court in instructing the jury on the alleged prior convictions was harmless as it was not reasonably probable the verdict was affected by informing the jury of the nature of the alleged prior convictions. (See People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836; People v. Bouzas (1991) 53 Cal.3d 467, 481.)

Page 5