Can a defendant bring a motion for habeas corpus against the prior?

All alleged constitutional infirmity in a prior conviction other than the right to counsel is a matter which must be left to proceedings in habeas corpus and not dealt with in the type of pretrial hearing discussed in People v. Coffey, 67 Cal.2d 204, 217--218, 60 Cal.Rptr. 457, 430 P.2d 15, (People v. Vienne, 30 Cal.App.3d 266, 270--272, 105 Cal.Rptr. 584.) In the instant case defendant's initial attack on the prior was on grounds other than denial of right to counsel. The judge correctly rejected [41 Cal.App.3d 953] those attacks. ³ At the outset of the trial when the judge asked him if he was questioning the constitutional validity of the prior, defense counsel responded he did not know. It was not until the fifth day of trial, after documentary proof of the prior had been received, that defense counsel for the first time asserted the record of conviction theretofore received in evidence failed to show that defendant was represented by counsel when he entered his plea of guilty. The next day, in proceedings outside the presence of the jury, the district attorney presented additional evidence showing that defendant had been represented by the public defender and had waived his rights to a jury trial and to confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses, and his privilege against self-incrimination. The judge thereupon determined that the prior was constitutionally valid.

Thus, despite defendant's belated challenge to the constitutional validity of the prior, the trial court did in fact comply with the procedure contemplated by People v. Coffey, Supra, 67 Cal.2d 204, 60 Cal.Rptr. 457, 430 P.2d 15. In passing, it should be noted that defendant makes no claim on appeal that the prior was constitutionally invalid.