Meraz

MEMORANDUM **

Jude Rea Meraz (“Meraz”) filed a habeas petition following his state court murder *617 conviction. We granted a COA with respect to one issue: was there sufficient evidence to support the finding that the murder of which Meraz was convicted was committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang pursuant to California Penal Code § 186.22(b)?

“A habeas petitioner challenging his state criminal conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 based on sufficiency of the evidence ‘is entitled to habeas corpus relief if it is found that upon the record evidence adduced at the trial no rational trier of fact could have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” Turner v. Calderon, 281 F.3d 851, 881 (9th Cir.2002) (quoting Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 324 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)). “[T]he relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. (citation omitted) (emphasis in the original).

To trigger the consequences of Cal.Penal Code § 186.22, “the prosecution must prove that the crime for which…

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. California Penal Code section 186.22, under which Meraz was sentenced, requires proof that “the crime for which [Meraz] was convicted had been committed ... with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members.” At the trial there was no evidence from which the jury could find that Meraz acted with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members. The only gang-related evidence came from the state’s expert who testified to the benefit the gang would receive from the killing by enhancing its power of strength through fear and intimidation. The Court of Appeal’s findings confirm the absence of evidence of the requisite specific intent. It found that the motives for the killing arose out of name-calling between Meraz’s mother and the victim’s sister and Meraz’s anger that the victim was going out with other men. It concluded only that the evidence showed that Meraz shot the victim, his girlfriend, to maintain his respect in the gang and that the gang benefited from increased respect as a re- *618 suit of the killing, not that Meraz acted with the requisite…