Erika A. v. Dominic J. CA5

Filed 12/6/22 Erika A. v. Dominic J. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

ERIKA A., F083944 Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. FL-20-003049) v.

DOMINIC J., OPINION Respondent.

THE COURT * APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Joseph R. Distaso, Judge. The Kalanta Law Office, Michael Kalanta and Savannah Wadsworth for Appellant. No appearance for Respondent. -ooOoo- At the conclusion of a hearing on December 9, 2021, the trial court ruled there was insufficient evidence to issue a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO), which

* Before Poochigian, Acting P. J., Smith, J. and DeSantos, J.

Erika A. (mother) sought against Dominic J. (father). Mother appeals, arguing the trial court did not base its decision on the totality of the circumstances and its conduct at the hearing impermissibly limited the record before it. While mother appeals with an agreed statement of the hearing, the agreed statement does not describe the testimony received at the hearing or the trial court’s evidentiary rulings. Given the limited record on appeal, we have no choice but to find no error and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On December 23, 2020, father filed a petition to establish a parental relationship in which he sought sole physical and joint legal custody of his then one-year-old daughter (daughter), who he shares with mother. A mediation was set for January 4, 2021. While father filed a proof of personal service on the day of the mediation, mother did not appear for the mediation. The hearing apparently went forward in her absence and father was granted custody of daughter. Mother filed a request for a DVRO on January 12, 2021, seeking to protect herself and daughter from father. Mother asserted after daughter was placed in father’s custody, he refused to allow her to speak with daughter. Mother’s declaration alleged verbal, emotional, and physical abuse, in addition to sexual assault and child molestation. Mother asked for sole legal and physical custody of daughter. In response to mother’s request for a DVRO, the trial court set a mediation hearing for February 2, 2021. The trial court denied mother’s request for a temporary restraining order until a hearing could be held, explaining a full hearing was needed because: (1) both sides filed allegations against the other; (2) mother did not appear at the January 4, 2021 mediation; (3) the parties had shared custody as recently as November and December 2020 by mutual agreement; (4) the parties’ November 30, 2020 text messages were cordial and did not show violent and harassing conduct; and (5) the case needed to be heard in child custody mediation with both parties present.