Urrutia
Urrutia v. Wallens CA2/8
Opinion
Opinion
Viramontes, J.
INTRODUCTION
Appellant Ashley Jordan Wallens appeals from a domestic violence restraining order issued against him under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (DVPA; Fam. Code,1 § 6200 et seq.) to protect his former wife, respondent Idoya Urrutia, their minor son, and Urrutia’s current husband. Among other arguments, Wallens asserts the order must be reversed because the trial court denied his right to competent counsel and a fair trial, made erroneous evidentiary rulings, and punitively included his minor son as a protected person. Urrutia argues Wallens’s appeal is moot, and even if not moot, his claims lack merit. We conclude the appeal is not moot; however, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the restraining order, and Wallens has not demonstrated any reversible error. We accordingly affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
I. The parties
Wallens and Urrutia were married and have one child together, X.W. The parties separated in 2014, and divorced in 2015. Wallens later married Devrie DeMarco, and Urrutia married Philip Pearson. In 2021, Wallens and DeMarco divorced following a series of domestic violence incidents between them. They obtained…