IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF XXX

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION _________

XXX
(Appellant)
vs.

XXX and XXX
(Respondents)

Appellate Case No. _______________
Trial Court Case Nos.: XXX

Appeal from the Superior Court of California, Contra Costa County

Trial Court Judge: Hon. _________

APPELLANT’S OPENING BRIEF

XXX
XXX

[ENTER NAME]
Attorney for Respondents

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ii
STATEMENT OF THE CASE 1
STATEMENT OF APPEALABILITY 1
STATEMENT OF FACTS 1
ARGUMENTS 4
THE TRIAL COURT VIOLATED APPELLANT’S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS WHEN IT DENIED THE
APPELLANT’S MOTION TO VACATE THE JUDGMENTS 4
A. The Standard of Review 4
B. Failing to give reasons for the denial of Appellant’s Motion to Vacate Judgment, is a violation of
Appellant’s due process right to a fair hearing 4
C. Failure to hear and/or consider the Children’s testimony amounts to a violation of due process rights 5
CONCLUSION 5
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 8

i

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases
XXXX

Statutes
CA Evidence Code §700 8
XXX Constitution, Article I, Section 7 7

6

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

This case concerns the abuse of the Appellant’s due process rights by the Trial Court.
Appellant had filed a motion to vacate a previous judgment by the Trial Court. As grounds for the
motion, the Appellant cited extrinsic fraud and mistake.
The Court dismissed and/or denied the motion, without giving any explanation. Appellant
avers that the Court’s decision is against the interests of justice and further and further violates her
due process rights. Appellant hereby appeals the said Judgment.
STATEMENT OF APPEALABILITY

This appeal is from the judgment of the Orange County Superior Court and is authorized by the
Code of Civil Procedure, section 904.1, subdivision (a).

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Appellant has three children, whom she got with her late husband. Appellant’s late husband
died in February XXX, following a hemorrhagic stroke.
At the time Appellant files this Appeal, her late husband’s family are disgruntled due to the
visiting restrictions that Appellant put in place when her late husband was still in hospital. This is the
reason why, on or about October XXX, the late husband’s cousin, XXX, and her
boyfriend ,XXX Peoples, beat up both the Appellant’s then ten-year old son Amare Dotson, and
Appellant in Richmond, California, while Appellant’s other children (XXX)
watched helplessly.
The litigation history relevant to this Appeal began when the Appellant filed a Complaint with
the District Attorney against XXX Peoples and his girlfriend, XXX.
Consequently, Appellant filed a Small Claims against Jerome Peoples. On or about August
XXX, the Court continued the hearing because XXX Peoples plead the fifth. This happened after the

6

Judge (Judge XXX) expressed her intention to hear evidence of Jerome People discussing why
XXX Peoples and XXX assaulted Appellant on October XXX . Present during this hearing
were Appellant’s two children. Appellant expected the Court to give them an opportunity to give their
testimony. However, the Court continued the case before the children could testify. It is notable that
the Court had decided to hear all the three cases at once.
Weeks later, Talisha Watts, for the second time, filed a frivolous restraining order against the
Appellant. The case was originally assigned to Hon. XXX. It is noteworthy that Judge
XXXX  had previously denied Appelant’s restraining orders that she filed against Peoples and Watts.
For this reason, Appellant filed a Peremptory Challenge to Judge XXX
A new Judge, Barry Baskin, was assigned to the case. Judge Baskin consequently dismissed
Watt’s restraining order. During the hearing on February XXX informed the Judge about
the cases filed against her by the Appellant and her children. It is at this point when the Judge
demanded all the cases be assigned to him. Upon the Appellant’s information and belief, the Judge
does not allow children in his court room. Accordingly, the cases were held and determined without
the Appellant’s children giving their testimonies either as Plaintiffs or witnesses.
Prior to the February XXX hearing, the parties in the cases had been instructed to submit
their evidence in a binder and drop them off at the court. The said hearing was held via Zoom. An
audio recording of the Zoom meeting shows that only Plaintiff and the two Defendants in that case
spoke during the hearing.
On or about May XXX, the Appellant filed motions for each three case seeking the Court to
Vacate the Judgments entered therein since the children did not get chance to testify. However, the
Court dismissed the motions on the grounds that they were untimely. Appellant then filed appeals
against the decisions, which were all denied on the grounds that the Appellant has no rights to appeal

6

small claims matters.
On or about July XXX, the Appellant filed a Motion to Vacate Judgment Declaration for
case numbers: XXX, in the Trial Court. Appellant averred inter alia, that the judgments in the
said cases were acquired through extrinsic fraud and mistake.
Notably, her children were never allowed to speak and be heard as both Plaintiffs and victims
on their own claims, or as witnesses of Appellant’s case. The children’s ages are now 115, 13, and 7,
which are competent ages to testify under oath. At the time the assault (that was the subject matter in
the challenged cases) occurred, the children were 12, 10, and 4, which are still competent ages to
testify under oath. It is further notable that the court never probed the competence of the children to
testify. The court also never conducted an assessment on the children to ascertain whether they are
able to testify under oath. The Court only provided a blanket denial against the Appellant’s intention
to have the children testify.
On or about August XXX, the Trial Court denied Appellant’s Motion. Notably, no reason
was given for the denial of the motion. Besides, the decision lacked the Judge’s signature.
Appellant avers that the denial of the Trial Court to hear and consider the testimony of
Appellant’s children, which testimony is crucial to show what the children actually saw in the October
XXX incidence, as well as the emotional and physical trauma that they face at the hands of Jerome
Peoples and Watts.
Appellant therefore appeals the said decision.

6
ARGUMENTS

THE TRIAL COURT VIOLATED APPELLANT’S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS WHEN
IT DENIED THE APPELLANT’S MOTION TO VACATE THE JUDGMENTS
A. The Standard of Review
When a court hears a case de novo, it is deciding the issues without reference to any legal
conclusion or assumption made by the previous court to hear the case. See XXX
Appeal Courts apply an independent, or de novo, standard of review to conclusions of law
regarding interpretation of evidence. Golden West Baseball Co. v. City of Anaheim (1994) 25
Cal.App.4th 11, 21-22, 31 Cal.Rptr.2d 378. It follows; an appellate court hearing a case de novo may
refer to the lower court’s record to determine the facts, but will rule on the evidence and matters of law
without deferring to that court’s findings. Id.
B. Failing to give reasons for the denial of Appellant’s Motion to Vacate Judgment, is a
violation of Appellant’s due process right to a fair hearing
The California Constitution, Article I, Section 7, provides: "A person may not be deprived of
life, liberty, or property without due process of law…" (emphasis added). "Due Process of Law," is
defined as a procedural safeguard to ensure that life, liberty, or property is not taken without a fair
process or procedure. “Procedural due process imposes constraints on governmental decisions which deprive
individuals of “liberty” or “property” interests within the meaning of the Due Process Clause…” Mathew v.
Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 332-33 (1976).
Plaintiff asserts that the Trial Court’s decision to issue a Judgment without giving reasons
should be challenged for violation of due process. The Superior Court gave no reason for its denial of
Appellant’s motion to vacate. The clerk only wrote “Request for Motion to Vacate Judgment denied”.

6

There is no reason issued to the Appellant on why the Court denied her motion.
Besides, a judgment entered in violation of due process is a void judgment and should be
dismissed and/or reversed. See XXX
C. Failure to hear and/or consider the Children’s testimony amounts to a violation of due
process rights

In the U.S. Supreme Court case of Grannis v. Ordean (1914) 234 U.S. 385, 34 S. Ct. 779, 58 L.
Ed. 1363, the Court stated, “The fundamental requisite of due process of law is the opportunity to be
heard.” (Emphasis added).
No law expressly bars children from giving testifying in Court. Notably, CA Evidence Code
§700 provides categorically that “every person, irrespective of age, is qualified to be a witness and no
person is disqualified to testify to any matter.”
Accordingly, a denial of an opportunity for the children to testify amounted to a violation of the
Appellant and the children’s due process right to a fair hearing, which demands for an opportunity to be
heard. The children were first-hand witnesses of the abuses and the blameworthy conduct of Jerome
Peoples and his girlfriend, Watts. Besides, the children have experienced personally, emotional and
physical harm from the actions of the said individuals. They are therefore competent to give their
testimony in Court under oath.

CONCLUSION

Based upon the foregoing arguments, and each of them, it is clear that Justice will not be
properly served unless the Judgment from the Trial Court is reversed and/or dismissed.
Accordingly, the Appellant prays that the Court reverses the judgment of the Trial Court; and in the
interest of justice, remand the case with further appropriate instructions. The Appellant also prays
for any other Order(s) this Court deems just.

6

DATED: _________________

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________
XXX, Appellant, pro se

8

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to rule 8.204(c) of the California Rules of Court, I hereby certify that this brief contains 1020
words, including footnotes. In making this certification, I have relied on the word count of the computer program
used to prepare the brief.

Respectfully Submitted,

____________________
XXX
Appellant, pro se

8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on [ENTER DATE], a copy of the foregoing Appeal Brief was filed in
this court. I further certify that on the said date, a copy of foregoing Appeal Brief was mailed by first-
class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, and properly addressed to the Respondents’ addresses.

Respectfully Submitted,

____________________
XXX
Appellant, pro se

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )