P. v. Arias CA1/5
After a jury convicted appellant Ismael Arias of drug-related felony offenses and misdemeanor resisting arrest, his counsel stipulated that he had suffered a prior conviction and had been released on bail or on his own recognizance at the time he committed one of the felonies. He contends these stipulations were invalid because they subjected him to a longer sentence and were not preceded by advisements regarding his constitutional rights as required by Boykin v. Alabama (1969) 395 U.S. 238, 243–244 (Boykin), In re Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122, 130–133 (Tahl), and In re Yurko (1974) 10 Cal.3d 857, 860 (Yurko).) We agree.
Comments on P. v. Arias CA1/5