Sweezey

Sweezey v. Virelas CA1/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 12, 2024A164089California5,043 words

Opinion

Opinion

Streeter, J.

I. BACKGROUND

In February 2020, Sweezey filed a request for a DVRO against Virelas. She alleged they had had a long-term relationship, lived together, and parented an 11-year-old daughter. Among Sweezey’s allegations were that Virelas had repeatedly raped and verbally abused her. She sought an order that Virelas move out and stay away from her and the child, that gave her sole possession and care of two dogs, and that established child custody and visitation rights. The court issued a temporary restraining order against Virelas and scheduled a hearing to consider a permanent order.

2 Undesignated statutory references are to the Family Code.

2 Virelas opposed Sweezey’s request, and in October 2020 also requested ex parte an emergency order giving him temporary sole custody of the child. Among his allegations were that the child had expressed concern about violence that was occurring between Sweezey and her boyfriend in the home, and that the child wanted to live with him. The court denied Virelas’s ex parte request pending a hearing. The court held a hearing in January 2021 to consider both Sweezey’s and Virelas’s requests. After the hearing, the court issued a one-year DVRO…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.