M.M. v. S.T. CA3

Filed 4/4/22 M.M. v. S.T. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

M. M., C093429

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. STKCVUCH20200006228) v.

S. T.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant S. T. appeals a civil harassment restraining order issued against her pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure1 section 527.6. The order prohibits defendant from harassing or contacting plaintiff M. M. Defendant appears to argue: (1) there was insufficient evidence to establish the necessary elements under section 527.6; and (2) the trial court erred in not allowing defendant to present evidence during the hearing and failing to consider the evidence submitted prior to the hearing. Because the record on appeal does not include plaintiff’s request for a restraining order, the exhibits in support of the request, a reporter’s transcript or settled statement of the restraining order hearing, or a minute order of the hearing, we are unable to evaluate defendant’s claims and must presume the trial court’s findings are correct. Therefore, we affirm.

1 Undesignated section references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The record on appeal includes defendant’s response to plaintiff’s request for a restraining order, three declarations filed by defendant, the restraining order issued by the court, the notice of appeal, the notice designating the record on appeal, and the register of actions. Omitted from the record on appeal are plaintiff’s request for a restraining order, the evidence in support of that request, the reporter’s transcript or a settled statement of the restraining order hearing, and the minute order for the hearing. The following summation is based on the limited record provided. On November 17, 2020, defendant filed a response to a request for a civil harassment restraining order. On December 28, 2020, defendant filed three declarations with the court. A hearing was held on December 29, 2020, where defendant, plaintiff, and a Spanish interpreter were present. On December 30, 2020, the trial court granted plaintiff’s request for a restraining order under section 527.6 against defendant. The three-year restraining order prohibits defendant from, among other things, harassing, intimidating, threatening, or contacting plaintiff, and includes a 100-yard-stay-away order. Defendant appeals. DISCUSSION I Sufficient Evidence Supports The Civil Harassment Restraining Order Defendant appears to contend insufficient evidence supports the civil harassment restraining order. Based on the limited record, we cannot agree. Section 527.6 authorizes a person who has suffered harassment to obtain an injunction against the harassing conduct. A trial court shall issue a civil harassment restraining order if, after a hearing, it finds by clear and convincing evidence that unlawful harassment exists. (§ 527.6.) We review issuance of a civil harassment restraining order for abuse of discretion, and the factual findings necessary to support the