Thomson v. Bacchus CA2/3

Filed 7/7/14 Thomson v. Bacchus CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

MISTY THOMSON, B244144

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SS022421) v.

HAROUN BACCHUS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, James K. Hahn, Judge. Dismissed as moot. Haroun Bacchus, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________

Defendant and appellant Haroun Bacchus (Bacchus), in propria persona, appeals a July 24, 2012 order granting a request by plaintiff and respondent Misty Roberts Thomson (Thomson) for a restraining order.1 2 The restraining order, by its terms, expired on July 24, 2013. Because this court cannot provide effective relief from the expired restraining order, the appeal is dismissed as moot.3 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On July 2, 2012, Thomson filed a request for a civil harassment restraining order against Bacchus. Thomson alleged, inter alia: She and her husband shared a Santa Monica apartment with Bacchus. In June 2011, she obtained a 100-yard restraining order against Bacchus. The order expired “a couple of months ago and he no longer lives with us but he continues to pay rent and is still on the lease. He stops in for a few minutes once a week and is hostile every time.” Thomson stated she was fearful for her safety in that Bacchus acted aggressively and physically obstructed her with his body. On July 2, 2012, the trial court issued a temporary restraining order, to remain in effect until the court hearing, scheduled for July 24, 2012. Bacchus filed a written response, denying he had been hostile and asserting he had given Thomson and her husband a lot of space by staying with relatives. Bacchus also indicated the subject apartment was rent-controlled, he had lived there a long time and it was his only residence. On July 24, 2012, the matter came on for hearing. The trial court issued a one- year restraining order directing Bacchus to stay at least 20 feet away from the apartment,