DVROs in California

If only everybody could get along and not mistreat their loved ones… I frequently get calls from folks seeking help with domestic violence restraining orders. Below is a general overview of what a DVRO is here in California, and what’s required to get one.

Pursuant to the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (DVPA), Fam. Code, § 6200 et seq., a court may issue a protective order to restrain any person for the purpose of preventing a recurrence of domestic violence and ensuring a period of separation of the persons involved upon reasonable proof of a past act or acts of abuse. Fam. Code, § 6300. The DVPA defines domestic violence as abuse perpetrated against a spouse or the child of a party. Fam. Code, § 6211, subds. (a) & (e). Abuse includes placing a person in reasonable apprehension of imminent serious bodily injury to that person or to another or engaging in any behavior that has been or could be enjoined pursuant to Fam. Code, § 6320. Fam. Code, § 6203, subd. (a)(3), (4). Enjoined conduct includes molesting, striking, stalking, threatening, or harassing. Fam. Code, § 6320, subd. (a). The DVPA requires a showing of past abuse by a preponderance of the evidence.

Although a temporary domestic violence restraining order may be issued on an ex parte basis without notice, Fam. Code, § 6320, subd. (a), a permanent restraining order may be issued only after notice and a hearing. Fam. Code, § 6345, subd. (a).

Fam. Code, § 6345, subd. (a), provides that a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) shall have an initial duration not exceeding five years, but may be renewed, upon the request of a party, either for five or more years, or permanently, at the discretion of the court, without a showing of further abuse since the issuance of the original order. The request for renewal may be brought at any time within the three months before the expiration of the orders.

The legal standard for renewal of a DVRO is whether the protected party entertains a reasonable apprehension of future abuse. This does not mean the court must find it is more likely than not that abuse will occur if the protective order is not renewed. It only means the evidence demonstrates it is more probable than not there is a sufficient risk of future abuse to find the protected party's apprehension genuine and reasonable. An imminent and present danger of abuse is not required; there must only be a reasonable apprehension that abuse will occur at some time in the future if the protective order is allowed to expire.

If you’re interested in seeking a DVRO or need help defending against one, feel free to give me a call to schedule a free consultation.