Fleming

DISCUSSION

I.

General Appellate Principles

Popescu's appellate briefing compels us to begin by reviewing settled principles of

appellate review. On appeal, a judgment or an order is presumed to be correct, and

Popescu as the party challenging the judgment or order must affirmatively show error.

(Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1140-1141; In re Marriage of Arceneaux

(1990) 51 Cal.3d 1130, 1133; Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) To

meet this burden, Popescu must provide cogent legal argument in support of his claims of

error with citation to legal authority, as well as an adequate record, with supporting

references. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(B), (C); Sims v. Department of

Corrections & Rehabilitation (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 1059, 1081 (Sims); Oliveira v.

Kiesler (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 1349, 1362; In re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke (2008) 164

Cal.App.4th 814, 830; Pringle v. La Chapelle (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 1000, 1003 & fn. 2;

3 Berger v. Godden (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 1113, 1119.) If he does not do so, we may

treat his point as waived or abandoned. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994;

People v. Stanley (1995) 10 Cal.4th…