Opinion
No. 2 CA-CV 2017-0176-FC
04-03-2018
JAKALA WINSTANLEY, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. CHAD GERLE, Defendant/ Appellant.
COUNSEL Chad Gerle, Sierra Vista In Propria Persona Law Office of Michael E. Farro, Sierra Vista By Michael E. Farro Counsel for Appellee
THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
See Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. 111(c)(1); Ariz. R. Civ. App. P. 28(a)(1), (f).
Appeal from the Superior Court in Cochise County
No. DO201700765
The Honorable Charles A. Irwin, Judge
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL
Chad Gerle, Sierra Vista
In Propria Persona
Law Office of Michael E. Farro, Sierra Vista
By Michael E. Farro
Counsel for Appellee
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Judge Brearcliffe authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Staring and Chief Judge Eckerstrom concurred.
BREARCLIFFE, Judge:
¶1 Chad Gerle appeals from the trial court's order refusing to dismiss an order of protection. Because Gerle has failed to develop arguments or provide and cite to the record supporting his assertions, we deem his arguments waived and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
¶2 In September 2017, Winstanley petitioned for and was granted an ex parte order of protection against Gerle protecting herself and their two children, A.G. and G.G. Gerle requested a hearing to dismiss the order, and an evidentiary hearing was held in October 2017. Following the evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied Gerle's request to dismiss the order and kept the order in place. This appeal followed.
¶3 On appeal, Gerle makes several arguments that the trial court erred by, among other things, granting the order of protection. He also alleges bias by the court. We review an order of protection for an abuse of discretion. See Cardoso v. Soldo, 230 Ariz. 614, ¶¶ 15-16 (App. 2012).
¶4 Gerle has failed to develop any legal arguments in support of his claims of error and bias, or to provide appropriate citations to the record. See Ariz. R. Civ. App. P. 13(a)(6), (7)(A) (opening brief must contain "issues presented for review, with appropriate references to the record" and "citations of legal authorities . . . on which the appellant relies"); see also Ritchie v. Krasner, 221 Ariz. 288, ¶ 62 (App. 2009) ("Opening briefs must present and address significant arguments, supported by authority that set forth the appellant's position on the issue in question."). He has also failed to provide a complete record. Baker v. Baker, 183 Ariz. 70, 73 (App. 1995) (Appellant is responsible for ensuring there is a complete trial court record on appeal.). In the absence of a complete trial record, which, given the claims, would include the transcript of the October 2017 hearing, we are unable to determine if the trial court showed bias or whether it abused its discretion in any of its rulings. Romero v. Sw. Ambulance, 211 Ariz. 200, ¶ 4 (App. 2005). We therefore deem Gerle's arguments waived. See Ritchie, 221
Ariz. 288, ¶ 62 (failure to cite to authorities and relevant record constitutes waiver). Even absent waiver, we must presume that the complete record, were it before us, would support the court's findings and conclusions. Baker, 183 Ariz. at 73.
Disposition
¶5 Gerle is not represented by counsel in this matter, however, "[o]ne who represents [him]self . . . is given the same consideration on appeal as one who has been represented by counsel. [H]e is held to the same familiarity with court procedures and the same notice of statutes, rules, and legal principles as is expected of a lawyer." Higgins v. Higgins, 194 Ariz. 266, ¶ 12 (App. 1999). For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the trial court, and we deny Gerle's request for costs on appeal.