Cited by

.”); 4 RICARDO R. v. LORI C., (“[T]rial judges are presumed to know the law and to apply it in making their decisions.” (citation omitted)).

¶ 18 (App. 2004) (noting that although the trial court’s minute entry did not specifically reference certain evidence, the evidence is “presumed to have been fully considered by the court prior to issuing its decision”).

-56, ¶ 18 (App. 2004) (citing Able Distrib.

4 HERRERA v. RIVERO Decision of the Court lacks competent evidence to support its decision, ¶ 5 (1999), or if the court “commits an error of law in the process of exercising its discretion.” ¶ 23 (App. 2004).

¶¶ 31-32 (App. 2004) (unlike a jury, the trial judge in a bench trial is presumed to know the law and to have applied it in making her decision).

Sec., ¶ 18 (App. 2008); ¶ 24 (App. 2004); ¶ 3 (App. 2002).

¶ 11 (App. 2013) (involving child custody and parenting time); ¶ 10 (App. 2004) (involving child support).

-81 (App. 2004) (we presume trial court considers all evidence before it).

Decision of the Court evidence, the juvenile court’s order states that it “carefully considered all of the testimony and admitted exhibits.” -56, ¶ 18, -81 (App. 2004) (appellate court presumes trial court has considered evidence presented before making a decision) (citation omitted).

-56, ¶ 18 (App. 2004) (citation omitted).

¶ 23 (App. 2004) (citation omitted).

Opinion of the Court commits an error of law in the process of exercising its discretion.”) ( ¶ 23 (App. 2004)).

A court abuses its discretion if the record lacks competent evidence to support its decision, ¶ 5 (1999), or if the 2 QUIGLEY v. QUIGLEY Decision of the Court court makes “an error of law in the process of exercising its discretion.” ¶ 23 (App. 2004).

–56, ¶ 18 (App. 2004) (noting that evidence admitted by the court is presumed to be considered).

¶ 2 (App. 2005) ( ¶ 23 (App. 2004)).

¶ 32 (App. 2004) (); (“The trial court’s decision will be upheld unless there exists no reasonable basis in the record upon which its decision could have been made.”).

¶11 On appeal, we presume the trial court exercised its discretion by considering all the relevant factors to determine whether to forfeit the entire bond amount or only a portion thereof.7 (appellate court presumes trial court knows law and applied correct standard unless presumption rebutted by record).

v. Microsoft Corp., ¶ 17 , ( , 297 n. 18, , 1224 n. 18 (1983)); ¶ 23 , (“An abuse of discretion exists when the trial court commits an error of law in the process of exercising its discretion.”).

We assume the trial court considered any admissible evidence presented to it before making its decision, –56, ¶ 18, –81 (App. 2004) and will affirm the court on any basis supported by the record.