Marriage of Melnichuk and Yegorov CA3

Filed 6/17/14 Marriage of Melnichuk and Yegorov 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

In re the Marriage of NELYA MELNICHUK and DMITRIY YEGOROV.

NELYA MELNICHUK,

Respondent, C072580

v. (Super. Ct. Nos. 03DV03371, DMITRIY YEGOROV, 04FL000784)

Appellant.

Dmitriy Yegorov appeals from the trial court’s order renewing a domestic violence restraining order against him, arguing reversal is necessary because the trial court relied on incompetent, false, or otherwise incredible witnesses. Nelya Melnichuk, petitioner in the trial court, responds that Yegorov’s challenges to the competency of certain witnesses who testified on Melnichuk’s behalf at the trial on her petition are waived by his failure to raise these challenges to the witnesses at trial, and Yegorov has failed to show the trial court abused its discretion in issuing the restraining order. We

1

reject Yegorov’s challenges to the competency and credibility of the witnesses because he failed to raise these challenges in the trial court. We also reject Yegorov’s assertion the trial court abused its discretion by not admitting the 20 declarations of neighbors in support of his opposition to the petition. Accordingly, we affirm the court’s order. BACKGROUND Yegorov and Melnichuk were previously married and, at the time of trial, had two teenage children. Melnichuk obtained a Domestic Violence Prevention Act (Fam. Code, § 6200 et seq.)1 restraining order against Yegorov in October 2003 after he pushed her so hard she flew across the room and into a piece of furniture. In December 2006 after Yegorov violated the restraining order, it was renewed for five years. In December 2011 after Yegorov moved into the apartment complex where Melnichuk lived with their children, Melnichuk brought the instant petition to renew the restraining order on the grounds Yegorov had violated the order by living within 100 yards of her, and continued to harass, stalk, and intimidate her by chasing her within the complex, cursing and yelling at her, eavesdropping at her door, and watching her apartment at all hours. Yegorov opposed the request, denying Melnichuk’s allegations and stating he moved into Melnichuk’s apartment complex so he could see their children “even if it is from afar” because Melnichuk has refused to respond to his efforts to coordinate his supervised visitation. The trial court imposed a permanent order restraining Yegorov from contacting or harassing Melnichuk and their children and ordering him to move from the apartment complex. Yegorov did not move from the complex, but moved for reconsideration on the grounds the parties’ respective apartments