C.O. v. O.O. CA4/1

Filed 4/9/25 C.O. v. O.O. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

C.O., D085016

Plaintiff and Appellant,

v. (Super. Ct. No. RID236737)

O.O.,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Riverside County, Gareit Newstrom, Commissioner. Affirmed. Christopher S. Hernandez for Plaintiff and Appellant. No appearance for Defendant and Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 C.O. appeals an order denying his request for a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) against O.O. Largely because C.O. did not provide an adequate record, we conclude that he has not demonstrated that the trial

1 We resolve this case by memorandum opinion pursuant to California Standards of Judicial Administration, section 8.1.

court abused its discretion or otherwise prejudicially erred. Therefore, we affirm the order. A trial court’s judgment or order is presumed correct, and it is the appellant’s burden to affirmatively show error on appeal. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564 [“All intendments and presumptions are indulged to support it on matters as to which the record is silent, and error must be affirmatively shown” [cleaned up]]; accord Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594, 608–609 (Jameson).) To make this showing, the appellant must present meaningful legal analysis supported by citations to facts in the record and, if possible, authority to support the claim of error. (Multani v. Witkin & Neal (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1428, 1457; see Cal. Rules

of Court,2 rule 8.204(a)(1)(C) [briefs must “[s]upport any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears”].) In addition, the appellant’s factual summary must be limited to “significant facts . . . in the record” (rule 8.204(a)(2)(C); CIT Group/Equipment Financing, Inc. v. Super DVD, Inc. (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 537, 539, fn. 1 [“it is well established that a reviewing court may not give any consideration to alleged facts that are outside of the record on appeal”]) and must include “all the material evidence on the point and not merely [his or her] own evidence” (Nwosu v. Uba (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1246 [cleaned up]). The appellant also must present an “adequate record” for review. (Ballard v. Uribe (1986) 41 Cal.3d 564, 574–575.) Rule 8.122(b) sets out the required contents of a clerk’s transcript. Among others, it “must” include “[a]ny . . . document filed . . . in the case in superior court” pertaining to the