J.S. v. R.P. CA3

Filed 1/9/26 J.S. v. R.P. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Placer) ----

J.S., C103512

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. SDR0039799)

v.

R.P.,

Defendant and Appellant.

The trial court granted respondent J.S. a temporary restraining order against appellant R.P. The trial court later extended the temporary restraining order at a hearing appellant was absent from. Appellant appeals alleging his due process rights were violated with the extension of the temporary restraining order. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This court detailed in a prior opinion the parties’ long legal history starting in 2011 after the birth of their son in 2010. (J.S. v. R.P. (Oct. 18, 2022, C094161, C094555) [nonpub. opn.].)

1

Most recently, respondent filed requests for a temporary domestic violence restraining order against appellant on November 19, 2024, and December 13, 2024. The trial court initially granted both but terminated them after respondent failed to appear for all hearings. On February 14, 2025, respondent filed another request for a domestic violence restraining order. Respondent stated she was resubmitting the request after termination of the prior order “due to remote appearance error.” (Capitalization omitted.) Respondent alleged in the request appellant abused her by “blatantly using the court system” to commit “ ‘legal bullying’ ” against her and stated she was “asking for help because [appellant] is using coercive control, intimidation, financial pressure, and emotional pain to ruin [her] life. All because [she] will not hand over custody and control of a child [appellant] barely knows. [Appellant] ignores [c]ourt orders, and just wages war.” Respondent also explained she met appellant by working for him in Florida, where he engaged in “pimping and trafficking [her] against [her] will.” Respondent fled to California shortly after their child was born and obtained a domestic violence restraining order against appellant in 2011. This order was terminated in 2015 at respondent’s request. (See J.S. v. R.P., supra, C094161, C094555.) The trial court issued a temporary restraining order on February 18, 2025, and set a hearing for March 13, 2025. On March 12, 2025, respondent filed a request to continue the hearing because “[appellant] ha[d] again evaded service by the [s]heriff.” A form from the sheriff’s department in Orange County, Florida, stated a service of process request was received on February 20, 2025, to serve the notice of the March 13, 2025 hearing to appellant who lives in Florida. An officer attempted to serve appellant five times: March 4, 7, 10, 12, and 13 of 2025. On the March 12, 2025 attempt, the form noted the officer “spoke to [the] subj[ect] who does not want to be served [and] wishes to be left alone. Subj[ect] is refusing/avoiding service.”