Cited by

¶14 Third, the court may make exceptions to the mootness doctrine if the issue could result in “collateral consequences” that could “continue to affect a party.” ¶ 9 (App. 2012).

¶ 5 (App. 2012) (recognizing that an appeal will be 3 IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.I.

Father asserts that “[a]s the sole surviving parent, all parenting time and legal decision-making rights flow to Father, absent further court orders to the contrary.” ¶9 A case is moot when a court’s action “will have no effect on the parties.” –17, ¶ 5 (App. 2012) (–94, ¶ 8 (App. 2011)).

¶ 5 (App. 2012) (noting a moot issue is one where the actions of a reviewing court will not affect the parties).

“A trial judge is presumed to be free of bias and prejudice and to overcome this presumption, a party must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the trial judge was, in fact, biased.” –20 ¶ 19 (App. 2012).

decision) ( ¶ 9 (App. 2012)).

While appellate courts generally do not consider moot questions, ¶ 15 (App. 2006), we may choose to do so at our discretion when the order at issue will continue to have collateral consequences for any of the parties, –18, ¶ 9 (2012).

STANDARD OF REVIEW Order of Protection: factual findings-substantial evidence; due process---de novo ().

¶ 14 (App. 2012) (applying the collateral consequences exception to mootness in the context of an expired order of protection).

¶ 6 (App. 2024) ( ¶ 16 (App. 2012)).

We defer to the superior court’s determination that Wife’s testimony about the confrontation was more credible than Husband’ ¶ 17 (App. 4 PINEDA v. CAMPOS Decision of the Court 2012).

¶12 We may exercise discretion and consider an appeal that has become moot when it presents an issue “of great public importance or one capable of repetition yet evading review.” ¶ 5 (App. 2012).

¶7 Generally, “we will dismiss an appeal as moot when our action as a reviewing court will have no effect on the parties.” ¶ 5 (App. 2012) ( ¶ 8 (App. 2011)).

¶ 5 (App. 2012) (stating appeals are generally dismissed "as moot when our action as a reviewing court will have no effect on the parties"); In re Matter of Salcido v. Hamilton, 1 CA-CV 23-0584 FC, 2024 WL 2933350, at *3, ¶ 18 (Ariz. App. June 11, 2024) (mem.

“A trial judge is presumed to be free of bias and prejudice and to overcome this presumption, a party must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the trial judge was, in fact, biased.” –20, ¶ 19 (App. 2012).

DISCUSSION ¶5 Mother argues the superior court applied the wrong standard of proof when upholding the order of protection.1 We review the decision to continue an order of protection for an abuse of discretion, which may include “an error of law [committed] in the process of reaching a discretionary conclusion.” ¶ 16 (App. 2012); ¶ 14 (App. 2012).

¶ 5 (App. 2012) (A moot appeal is one where the appellate court’s action will not affect the parties.).

Co., 4 Ariz. App. at 285); ¶ 4 n.3 (App. 2014) ("In the exercise of our discretion, we decline to treat her failure to file an answering brief as a confession of error."); ¶ 4 n.1 (App. 2012) (noting we are "not required" to treat failure to file an answering brief as confession of reversible error); McDowell Mountain Ranch Cmty.

¶¶ 10-12 (App. 2012) (orders of protection are relevant to subsequent orders of protection and child custody disputes, require registration in central repository, and cause “reputational harm and stigma” to defendant).

¶12 We generally do not consider moot questions.3 ¶ 5 (App. 2012).