Moberg

DISCUSSION

Husband alleges that the trial court abused its discretion in granting a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO)against him and denying his request for a DVRO against Wife. Specifically, he alleges that the trial court “did not review all the information at hand [and] was also emotionally manipulated by Ms. Moberg’s testimony.” A court’s decision to issue or deny a DVRO is reviewed for abuse of discretion. We affirm the court’s decision unless it is unsupported by substantial evidence. (Herriott v. Herriott (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 212, 223). In this case, we cannot conduct such a review with the record before us, because “appellant’s omission of the reporter’s transcript precludes appellant from raising any evidentiary issues on appeal” including the sufficiency of the evidence to support the court’s decision. (Hodges v. Mark (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 651, 657.) We do not have access to the testimony or evidence presented at the trial, because Husband has not provided the reporter’s transcript of the testimony by the witnesses during the two day trial, nor does the record include most of the exhibits that were admitted into evidence at trial.

2 We granted Husband’s…