People v. Meraz CA4/1

• Court: California Court of Appeal
• Decided: March 4, 2026
• Docket: D083575
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Filed 3/4/26 P. v. Meraz CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D083575

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD233469)

RAFAEL MERAZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Joan P. Weber, Judge. Dismissed.

Nancy J. King, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Eric A. Swenson, Supervising Deputy Attorney General and Felicity Senoski, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Rafael Meraz appealed from the denial of his Penal Code section 1172.6

resentencing petition following his conviction for murder in 2007.1 He filed a separate petition for habeas corpus before this court. (In re Meraz (D085117).) In that petition, Meraz made an argument related to the one in this appeal, asserting entitlement to an ameliorative change in the law. By separate order, we have granted the relief requested in Meraz’s petition for habeas corpus. In doing so, we have conditionally reversed the judgment and remanded the matter to the juvenile court for proceedings consistent with that order. An appeal will be dismissed as moot when an event occurs which makes it impossible for the appellate court to grant effectual relief to the appellant. (People v. DeLeon (2017) 3 Cal.5th 640, 645.) Because we have granted Meraz his requested relief and reversed the judgment, we cannot now grant him review of the denial of his resentencing petition. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot.

1 Meraz sought judicial notice of documents related to a previous writ petition. We deny the motion as unnecessary to our resolution of this appeal. (See County of San Diego v. State of California (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 580, 613, fn. 29.) 2 DISPOSITION The appeal is dismissed.

O’ROURKE, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

IRION, J.

KELETY, J.