Ramirez

DISCUSSION

On appeal, Cortes contends the trial court erred in issuing the restraining order because it granted the order “based on slanderous testimony and based on appearance only,” which was a “clear case of judicial bias.” Cortes claims the testimony of Ramirez and her witnesses was “slanderous” and she was unable to satisfy her burden of proof that the alleged conduct occurred. He specifically asserts that it was clear the relationship was consensual and nothing devious happened, Ramirez failed to provide any proof that he was abusive, the evidence showed Ramirez was happy with the relationship, and Ramirez’s mother and another individual who testified at the hearing were unable to prove he committed any of the “atrocities” Ramirez alleged he committed. Cortes submits Ramirez sought the restraining order solely out of hate and pettiness because Cortes left the relationship. The difficulty with Cortes’s arguments on appeal is that he has not provided us with an adequate record to evaluate his claims of error. We review the trial court’s order under the abuse of discretion standard since an order granting a domestic violence restraining order “ ‘ “ ‘rests in the sound…