People v. Johnson (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 169, Johnson maintained on appeal that his conviction of second degree felony murder based on a violation of section 2800.2 could not stand because the offense is not inherently dangerous, nor is it "'an offense carrying "a high probability" that death will result.'" (15 Cal.App.4th at p. 173.) The Johnson court disagreed. "It would seem clear as a matter of logic that any felony whose key element is 'wanton disregard' for human life necessarily falls within the scope of 'inherently dangerous' felonies." (Ibid.) In People v. Johnson, supra, 15 Cal.App.4th at pages 174-175, the court rejected the defendant's argument that his second degree felony-murder conviction based on a violation of section 2800.2 could not stand because the felony was an integral part of the homicide, in violation of the felony-merger rule. The court found that the rule had no application because the underlying felony had a purpose other than the assault that resulted in death. "It is clear that Johnson's intent was 'to elude a pursuing peace officer' ( Veh. Code, 2800.1) rather than to commit an assault upon any person." ( Id. at p. 175.) The Court found that the defendant's admission of prior conviction allegations was not knowing and voluntary under the totality of the circumstances because the court failed to advise the defendant of his right against confrontation and right against self incrimination. In addressing arguments similar to those raised by respondent here the Johnson court stated: "We have no doubt that defendant was in fact aware of his right to . . . confront witnesses and his right to remain silent, all of which he had just exercised in trial. What is impossible to determine from this silent record is whether defendant not only was aware of these rights, but was also prepared to waive them as a condition to admitting his prior offenses. . . ." ( Id. at p. 178.)