Narrative Opinion Summary
E.M. appeals pro se from a January 29, 2016 order by the Centre County Court of Common Pleas that extended a Protection From Abuse (PFA) order against him for three years. The appeal is dismissed due to E.M.'s failure to provide a complete record for review, specifically the transcript of the January 28, 2016 hearing related to indirect criminal contempt. E.M. argues that the extension of the PFA order violated 23 Pa.C.S. § 6114(b)(4), as the plaintiff was not present at the contempt hearing and did not request an extension. However, the appellate court notes that the lack of a transcript prevents them from reviewing the trial court's decision. E.M. did not submit a transcript request with his notice of appeal, and although he was granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis, he still did not ensure the necessary record was provided. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1911(d).
Legal Issues Addressed
Consequences of Failing to Request Necessary Transcriptssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Despite being granted in forma pauperis status, E.M.'s failure to request and provide the transcript with his notice of appeal resulted in the dismissal of his appeal.
Reasoning: E.M. did not submit a transcript request with his notice of appeal, and although he was granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis, he still did not ensure the necessary record was provided.
Dismissal of Appeal under Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1911(d)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appeal was dismissed pursuant to Rule 1911(d) because the appellant did not comply with the requirement to provide a complete record, including necessary transcripts, for appellate review.
Reasoning: Consequently, the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1911(d).
Extension of Protection From Abuse Order under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6114(b)(4)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant contested the extension of the PFA order, arguing it was invalid due to the plaintiff's absence at the contempt hearing and lack of a request for extension. However, the court could not address this argument due to the absence of a complete record.
Reasoning: E.M. argues that the extension of the PFA order violated 23 Pa.C.S. § 6114(b)(4), as the plaintiff was not present at the contempt hearing and did not request an extension.
Requirement for Complete Record on Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's failure to provide the necessary transcript from the hearing led to the dismissal of the appeal, underscoring the requirement for a complete record to facilitate appellate review.
Reasoning: The appeal is dismissed due to E.M.'s failure to provide a complete record for review, specifically the transcript of the January 28, 2016 hearing related to indirect criminal contempt.