Ramirez v. Cortes CA5

Filed 11/26/24 Ramirez v. Cortes CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

KRISTEN RAMIREZ,

Respondent, F087680

v. (Super. Ct. No. BFL-23-004955)

MICHAEL CORTES, OPINION Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Kevin Francis Moran, Temporary Judge. Michael Cortes, in pro. per., for Appellant. No appearance for Respondent. -ooOoo- Michael Cortes appeals from the trial court’s order granting a two-year domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) against him for the protection of Kristen Ramirez and her brother who lived with her. Cortes, who has represented himself throughout these proceedings, contends the order is not supported by substantial evidence and the trial

* Before Peña, Acting P. J., Smith, J. and DeSantos, J.

court was biased against him. Ramirez did not file a respondent’s brief. We affirm because Cortes failed to provide an adequate record on appeal to allow us to review his claims. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The factual summary is limited because the appellate record is inadequate. The only document Cortes designated for inclusion in the clerk’s transcript is the minute order of the hearing on Ramirez’s request for a restraining order. Consequently, the clerk’s transcript contains only the minute order, the restraining order after hearing, the notice of filing of appeal, the notice of appeal, Cortes’s notice designating the record on appeal, and the register of actions. Also, there is no record of the hearing testimony, as Cortes elected to proceed without a record of the oral proceedings. Although there was no court reporter at the hearing, Cortes did not provide an agreed or settled statement of the proceedings. Accordingly, we cannot glean much from the record. Ramirez filed a request for a domestic violence restraining order which, according to Cortes’s appellate brief, alleged Cortes sexually abused her during their three-year relationship. The details of her request or the evidence supporting it, however, are not in the record. Cortes filed a response and declaration, but we do not know what his response was as these documents are not in the record. According to Cortes’s appellate brief, he ended the relationship because he feared for his life. The hearing on Ramirez’s request was held on February 22, 2024, where the parties represented themselves. The minute order states that no court reporter was present, Ramirez was sworn and testified, as were four witnesses who testified on her behalf, three witnesses were sworn and testified on Cortes’ behalf, and Cortes was sworn and testified. After the parties presented argument, the trial court found, pursuant to Family Code section 6300, subdivision (a), that there was good cause, based on the totality of the evidence, the affidavit, and testimony of the parties, to issue restraining