A restraining order after hearing (ROAH) is a finding that the restrained party perpetrated domestic violence such that the FC § 3044 presumption arises. C.C. sought a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) protecting her from D.V., the father of her two children. The court approved the parties’ stipulated ROAH, which C.C. appealed. At a later hearing, the court ordered shared custody of the minors without addressing FC § 3044, which requires that before shared custody can be ordered where a parent has perpetrated domestic violence, the court must find that the presumption of detriment has been rebutted. C.C. appealed. The reviewing court consolidated the two appeals and reversed in part. Despite mootness, the reviewing court found this case was of broad public interest and that the parties may continue to seek custody modifications. Here, the parties’ stipulated ROAH was a judicial finding that D.V. had perpetrated domestic abuse and thus triggered the FC § 3044 presumption. When the trial court made custody findings after the issuance of the ROAH, it was thus required to apply FC § 3044. Since it did not do so, it cannot be concluded that it would have issued the same orders if it had followed the law, so reversal is required.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here:  https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A168514.PDF