Maldonado v. Maldonado

In January 1992, Mrs. Maldonado (plaintiff) was hospitalized after suffering abuse from her husband, Mr. Maldonado (defendant). After receiving medical treatment, Mrs. Maldonado obtained a 14-day temporary protective order against Mr. Maldonado. Mrs. Maldonado then sought a civil protection order (CPO) to protect herself and the couples’ two children. Mr. Maldonado consented to the CPO. A trial court issued the CPO to remain in effect until January 30, 1993. While the CPO was in effect, Mr. Maldonado was criminally charged for the abuse. On December 21, 1992, Mrs. Maldonado requested that the CPO to be extended through January 30, 1994. Mrs. Maldonado sought for the extension to mandate that Mr. Maldonado could not (1) telephone the family; (2) abuse or threaten the family; or (3) enter the family’s home, Mrs. Maldonado’s place of work, or the children’s school. Additionally, Mrs. Maldonado requested that the extended CPO would preserve her full-custody status and require Mr. Maldonado to pay child support. Mr. Maldonado consented to the extension and a hearing was scheduled for January 26, 1993. Prior to the hearing, Mr. Maldonado pleaded guilty to the criminal charges against him. On December 30, 1992, Mr. Maldonado was sentenced to serve at least two years in prison. The trial court then held the extension hearing. Mrs. Maldonado argued that the CPO should be extended through January 1994. Mrs. Maldonado provided evidence that, although Mr. Maldonado’s prison sentence was intended to last until at least December 1994, there was a possibility that he could be released early because of a furlough program, parole eligibility, or receiving credit for his time in custody before sentencing. The trial judge denied the extension on the ground that it was not necessary because Mr. Maldonado was incarcerated. Mrs. Maldonado appealed.