Vi-Geant

DISCUSSION

I Vi-Geant contends she was wrongfully denied a civil harassment restraining order. We construe this as a contention that the evidence does not support the trial court’s order denying Vi-Geant’s request.3 Section 527.6, subdivision (a), allows “[a] person who has suffered harassment” to “seek a temporary restraining order and an order after hearing prohibiting harassment . . . .” “If the judge finds by clear and convincing evidence that unlawful harassment exists, an order shall issue prohibiting the harassment.” (§ 527.6, subd. (i).) Vi-Geant’s contention is without merit because she fails to establish by citation to evidence in the record that she was harassed. Appealed judgments and orders are presumed correct, and error must be affirmatively shown. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) An appellant is bound by rules of appellate procedure designed to facilitate our review of claims of reversible error. For example, an appellate brief must “[s]upport any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(C); see Pierotti v. Torian

3 Vi-Geant…