People v. Garza

Opinion

CHRISTIAN, J.

Walter Eugene Garza appeals from a judgment of imprisonment after he pleaded guilty to nighttime burglary (Pen. Code, § 459).

I

*

n

Before accepting appellant’s plea of guilty, the court questioned him concerning waiver of his rights to freedom from self-incrimination, confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses and trial by jury. (See

Bunnell

v.

Superior Court

(1975) 13 Cal.3d 592, 605 [119 Cal.Rptr. 302, 531 P.2d 1086];

In re Tahl

(1969) 1 Cal.3d 122, 132 [81 Cal.Rptr. 577, 460 P.2d 449], cert. den. (1970) 398 U.S. 911 [26 L.Ed.2d 72, 90 S.Ct. 1708].) Appellant contends the court’s explanations of the latter two rights were inadequate. Leaving aside the fact that appellant did not seek a certificate of probable cause to authorize appellate review of matters occurring before the plea (Pen. Code, § 1237.5), the record shows the court met its responsibility under

Tahl

of informing appellant of “the essential character of the constitutional privileges in

[133]

lay language” which does not require resort to inference.

(People

v.

Lizarraga

(1974) 43 Cal.App.3d 815, 818 [118 Cal.Rptr. 208];

People

v.

Johnson

(1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 866, 876 [143 Cal.Rptr. 852].)