I.M.

DISCUSSION

Starting with the alleged January 2020 order, appellant cites nothing in the record, in fact, he hasn’t supplied any record concerning this order. As best we can tell based on

1 the parties’ briefing, the trial court issued this order in a distinct case that was never appealed and is thus not properly before us.1 (See Hollister Convalescent Hosp., Inc. v. Rico (1975) 15 Cal.3d 660, 670 [“the timely filing of an appropriate notice of appeal or its legal equivalent is an absolute prerequisite to the exercise of appellate jurisdiction”].) Thus, we do not address it. Turning to the March 2020 order, the only order he appears to have appealed, appellant argues that he had physical evidence to present to the court at the hearing on the restraining order, yet the court refused to look at it. In a two-sentence argument with no citations to the record, he states: “The evidence currently and that was supposed to had been reviewed back in January & [M]arch 202[0] will refute and raise concerns why wasn’t it looked at and accepted. I was denied any chance to submit any evidence.” Appellant is proceeding in pro. per. His pleadings and papers should thus be liberally construed in…