Gun Violence Restraining Orders in California

A gun violence restraining order (GVRO) is California’s “red flag” law — a civil court order under Penal Code §§ 18100–18205 that temporarily bars a person from owning, possessing, purchasing, or receiving firearms and ammunition when a court finds they pose a significant danger of harming themselves or others with a firearm. It comes in three forms: a law-enforcement emergency order and an ex parte order (each lasting up to 21 days), and an order after a noticed hearing that lasts one to five years and requires proof by clear and convincing evidence. A GVRO requires the person to surrender all firearms within 24 hours. It can be sought by family, law enforcement, employers, coworkers, teachers, and roommates. Because a GVRO so often arrives alongside a criminal investigation, the defense has to be coordinated with the criminal case. The Restraining Order Law Firm defends Californians whose firearm rights are at stake — and assists families and employers who need to act. Call (888) 808-2179 for a free, confidential consultation.

Review by Matthew Barhoma, CA Bar No. 319339 — California restraining-order and firearms counsel. As a d/b/a of Barhoma Law, P.C. (sister firm to Power Trial Lawyers), our restraining-order practice is paired with deep criminal-defense and California firearms-law experience.

Served with a GVRO — or ordered to surrender your firearms? A temporary order can take effect immediately and requires you to give up every firearm within 24 hours, and the hearing that decides whether you lose your gun rights for up to five years is usually set within 21 days. Immediate action protects your rights. Call (888) 808-2179 now. If anyone is in danger, call 911 first.

Gun violence restraining order in California: quick facts

A gun violence restraining order is unlike any other California protective order: it is not about a relationship or a single victim — it is about firearms and danger. For a law-abiding gun owner, a GVRO can mean surrendering a lifetime collection within 24 hours, losing a concealed-carry license, and being barred from firearms for years, often on the strength of one accusation. For a family watching a loved one in crisis, it can be a tool that saves a life. This page explains exactly how California’s red flag law works, who can use it, what it does to your rights, whether it is constitutional, and how it is defended — by a firm whose restraining-order practice is built on top of serious firearms and criminal-defense experience.

Talk to a gun violence restraining order lawyer — free, confidential consultation → (888) 808-2179

GVRO at a glance

What is a gun violence restraining order?

A gun violence restraining order is a civil court order — California’s version of a “red flag” or “extreme risk protection” law — that temporarily removes a person’s access to firearms and ammunition when a court finds they pose a significant danger of causing personal injury to themselves or others by having a gun. It is governed by Penal Code §§ 18100–18205. California was the first state in the nation to enact this kind of law, in 2014, and it has been expanded several times since.

A GVRO is not a criminal conviction and does not, by itself, put anyone in jail. But it is serious: it strips firearm rights, requires surrender of every firearm, bars new purchases, ends any concealed-carry license, and is entered into state databases. And it frequently travels with a criminal investigation — the same conduct that prompts a GVRO (a threat, a crisis, an arrest) can lead to criminal charges, which is why a GVRO should never be handled in isolation. For how firearm prohibitions work across all California protective orders, see our guide to restraining orders and firearms.

The three kinds of gun violence restraining order

California’s red flag law actually creates three distinct orders, which is a common source of confusion:

The first two are temporary and fast — they exist to remove guns now and bridge to a hearing. The third is the real contest: a noticed hearing where the petitioner must prove the case by clear and convincing evidence, and where the respondent can lose firearm rights for up to five years. That hearing is where the case is won or lost.

Who can petition for a GVRO in California?

The list of people who can ask a court to take someone’s firearms has expanded significantly since 2014. Today, a GVRO may be sought by:

This expansion (through AB 1493 and later amendments) means a GVRO can now originate from work or school, not just from family or police. It also means petitions can be mistaken, retaliatory, or based on secondhand fear — which is why the law sets a high bar at the hearing and why respondents have real defenses.

Dominating the statute: Penal Code § 18100 et seq.

Because a GVRO turns entirely on the controlling statute, it is worth understanding the framework in detail. (Verify all citations against the current code at leginfo before relying on them.)

The core prohibition (§§ 18100, 18120). A GVRO prohibits the restrained person from having in their custody or control, owning, purchasing, possessing, or receiving any firearms or ammunition for the duration of the order. The person must surrender all firearms within 24 hours — to local law enforcement or by sale/transfer to a licensed dealer — and file a receipt with the court (§ 18120). The court may also issue a search warrant to recover firearms if there is probable cause to believe the person has not complied (§ 18108).

The danger standard, and the factors a court weighs (§ 18155). For an after-hearing order, the petitioner must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the person poses a significant danger of personal injury to self or others by having a firearm, and that the order is necessary. In deciding, the court considers statutory factors including a recent threat or act of violence toward self or others; a pattern of violent acts or threats in the past 12 months; violation of a protective order; prior weapons or violence convictions; reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm; recent acquisition of firearms or ammunition; and evidence of recent abuse of controlled substances or alcohol. The required showing is lower for the temporary ex parte order (“substantial likelihood”) and highest for the after-hearing order (“clear and convincing”).

Duration and renewal (§§ 18175, 18190). After a hearing, a GVRO lasts one to five years — the maximum was extended from one year to five by AB 12 (operative September 1, 2023). The petitioner (or law enforcement) may seek renewal within the three months before expiration, but must again prove the danger continues.

Ending an order early (§ 18185). The restrained person may request one hearing during the order’s term to ask the court to terminate it, where the petitioner bears the burden to show the danger persists.

Penalties (§§ 18200, 18205). Filing a petition that contains false information or is filed to harass is a misdemeanor (§ 18200). And owning or possessing a firearm in violation of a GVRO is a misdemeanor that also extends the firearm prohibition by five years (§ 18205) — and can expose the person to a separate charge under Penal Code § 29825.

Amendment history. AB 1014 created the GVRO (2014, operative 2016, family + law enforcement). AB 1493 expanded the petitioner classes (employers, coworkers, teachers/school staff) and streamlined the process. AB 12 extended the after-hearing maximum to five years (operative 2023). See the 2024–2025 statutory updates and our California restraining order law guide.

Is California’s red flag law constitutional?

This is the question gun owners ask first — and it has a clear answer, with nuance. To date, courts have upheld red flag laws against challenges that they are unconstitutionally vague, violate due process, or violate the Second Amendment. The framework fits within the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in United States v. Rahimi, which upheld the federal prohibition on firearm possession by individuals subject to domestic-violence restraining orders and confirmed that, consistent with history and tradition, a person who poses a credible threat to others may be temporarily disarmed through a court process. California’s GVRO statute was modeled on the domestic-violence restraining-order framework and provides notice, a hearing, the clear-and-convincing standard, a right to one termination hearing, and a defined duration.

That does not mean the process is risk-free for respondents. Critics — and many defense lawyers — note that an ex parte order can remove firearms before any hearing, based on one side’s account, and that “significant danger” requires careful, evidence-based scrutiny rather than reflexive deference. The constitutional protections are real, but they only protect a respondent who shows up, responds, and holds the petitioner to the clear-and-convincing standard. That is the work.

What a GVRO does to your rights

A gun violence restraining order is narrow in subject but sweeping in effect. While it is in force, the restrained person:

• Cannot own, possess, buy, or receive firearms or ammunition anywhere in California.
• Must surrender every firearm within 24 hours (§ 18120) and file proof with the court.
• Loses any concealed-carry weapon (CCW) license — it cannot coexist with a GVRO.
• Is entered into state firearm databases, flagging the prohibition to law enforcement statewide.
• Faces a federal dimension — being a prohibited person under a qualifying order can carry federal firearm consequences.
• Risks new criminal charges for any violation (Pen. Code §§ 18205, 29825).

For most people a GVRO is temporary, but its consequences — especially for those whose livelihood depends on firearms — are immediate and severe.

How the GVRO process works (step by step)

1. The petition (GV-100). An eligible petitioner files a Petition for Gun Violence Restraining Order (Form GV-100), with facts supporting a significant danger. Law enforcement can instead obtain an emergency order by phone from an on-call judge.
2. Temporary order (GV-110). A judge may issue an ex parte temporary GVRO (Form GV-110) — often the same day, without notice — lasting up to 21 days.
3. Surrender of firearms. Within 24 hours of service, the restrained person must surrender all firearms and ammunition and file a receipt (§ 18120).
4. Service and notice (GV-109). The respondent is served with notice of the hearing and the temporary order.
5. The response (GV-120). The respondent may file a Response (Form GV-120) and present evidence. Doing nothing is dangerous — the order can issue by default for up to five years.
6. The hearing. Generally within 21 days. The petitioner must prove a significant danger by clear and convincing evidence; the respondent can testify, cross-examine, and present evidence — carefully coordinated with any criminal case.
7. Order after hearing (GV-130). If granted, the GVRO After Hearing (Form GV-130) lasts one to five years.
8. Renewal and termination. The petitioner may seek renewal before expiration; the respondent may request one hearing during the term to end the order early (§§ 18185, 18190).

The piece most people miss: the parallel criminal case

Here is what makes a GVRO different from every other restraining order — and where the wrong move can be catastrophic. A GVRO is frequently filed alongside, or just ahead of, a criminal case. The threat, the welfare check, the arrest, or the domestic dispute that triggered the GVRO is often the same conduct a prosecutor is reviewing for charges — criminal threats (Penal Code § 422), domestic violence, brandishing, or firearm offenses.

That creates a trap. The GVRO hearing happens fast — within 21 days — and the respondent has the right to testify and tell their side. But anything said in the GVRO hearing can be used in the criminal case. Testifying to clear your gun rights can hand the prosecution evidence; staying silent can weaken your GVRO defense. Navigating that tension — the Fifth Amendment posture, the timing, what to concede and what to contest — is the heart of defending a GVRO well, and it is exactly where a firm that does both restraining orders and criminal defense matters.

As a d/b/a of Barhoma Law, P.C., our restraining-order practice is paired with the criminal-defense and California firearms work of our sister firm, Power Trial Lawyers. When a GVRO overlaps a criminal investigation, we coordinate the two — see Power Trial Lawyers on Penal Code § 422 criminal threats and gun violence restraining order defense. Internally, see Criminal Protective Orders for orders that arise from the criminal case itself.

Our firearms + restraining-order trial experience

When your gun rights are on the line, what matters is whether your lawyer has actually litigated — and won — restraining-order cases where firearms were at stake. We have. The results below are civil harassment and domestic violence restraining-order matters (not GVROs), offered to show our track record taking firearm-rights cases to trial and restoring our clients’ rights. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Result — civil harassment restraining order denied after trial; 40+ firearms; gun rights restored

“I hired Matthew Barhoma … after being served with a civil harassment restraining order. Matthew successfully represented me … and protected my Second Amendment rights, which were at risk because of what I believed was a frivolous TRO. … the case was won and my gun rights were restored. … clear, responsive, strategic, and confident every step of the way.” — Richard K., 5 stars (Google)

Result — domestic violence restraining order denied after trial; firearm rights restored

These are restraining-order trials where firearm rights were at the center — the same stakes a GVRO puts on the table. See more on our case results and client testimonials pages. Every case is different; prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Real GVRO scenarios we see

These are common, hypothetical situations — not client stories — that show how California red flag cases actually unfold.

The family member in crisis. A relative is going through a mental-health crisis and has made alarming statements. A family member petitions for a GVRO to remove firearms temporarily. Here the order may be appropriate — and the goal is often a measured, time-limited result, not a five-year prohibition.

The law-enforcement petition after a call. Police respond to a welfare check, a domestic disturbance, or a threat report and obtain an emergency GVRO from an on-call judge. The guns are gone within 24 hours, and a hearing is set — often with a criminal investigation running in parallel.

The workplace or school report. Under the expanded law, an employer, coworker, or teacher petitions after a threatening statement. These petitions can be sincere — or based on secondhand fear, office conflict, or a misread comment. → Workplace Violence Restraining Orders

The domestic dispute that becomes a gun case. A heated argument leads to a DV allegation, and a GVRO (or a DVRO with a firearm-surrender order) follows. → Domestic Violence Restraining Orders

The “significant danger” that isn’t. A lawful gun owner makes an angry but non-violent statement, posts something online, or is reported by someone with a grudge. Substantial likelihood and significant danger are real legal standards — venting and ownership are not the same as danger.

The retaliatory or false petition. A GVRO is used as leverage in a divorce, a custody fight, a business dispute, or a neighbor feud. Filing a petition with false information or to harass is itself a crime (§ 18200). → False Allegations

The suicide-risk case. Many GVROs involve a person in danger to themselves. These call for compassion and a plan — temporary safety plus a path to restoring rights — not just litigation.

Common reasons GVROs are filed

• Threats against coworkers or a workplace — increasingly the basis for employer or coworker petitions.
• A family member’s mental-health or suicidal crisis — the original purpose of the law.
• Social-media or online threats — posts read as threats of gun violence.
• A domestic dispute — often overlapping with a DVRO or criminal case.
• Statements at a school — by or about a student, prompting a school-staff petition.
• After an arrest or police contact — law enforcement seeks to remove firearms while a case is investigated.
• Reported “red flags” — brandishing, reckless firearm use, or a pattern of threats within the past year.

Whether any of these meets the clear-and-convincing standard is the entire question — and where the case is fought.

If your firearms are at risk: defending a GVRO

If you’ve been served, you are the respondent, and a GVRO is not automatic. The petitioner must prove a significant danger by clear and convincing evidence, and you have the right to respond, present evidence, cross-examine, and be represented. The defenses red flag cases turn on: (1) there is no significant danger — the conduct was lawful, non-violent, or misread; (2) the petition is false, exaggerated, or retaliatory (and a knowingly false petition is itself a crime, § 18200); (3) the evidence falls short of clear and convincing; or (4) the order is overbroad or unnecessary, and a narrower result or early termination is warranted (§ 18185).

Two cautions are non-negotiable. Surrender your firearms on time — possession in violation is a crime that extends the prohibition (§ 18205). And coordinate with any criminal case before you testify — what you say to save your gun rights can be used against you by a prosecutor.

If you were served with a GVRO, act now

• You must surrender all firearms within 24 hours — missing that deadline is a new crime.
• The hearing is within ~21 days — and it decides whether you lose your gun rights for up to five years.
• Anything you say can affect a parallel criminal case — your Fifth Amendment posture has to be planned.
• A default order can last five years if you don’t respond and appear.

Protect your rights before the hearing. Call (888) 808-2179 now, or request a free consultation.

→ How to Fight a Restraining Order · Legal Defenses · Restraining Orders & Firearms

If you need to protect someone: seeking a GVRO

If a family member, employee, coworker, or student poses a real firearm danger, a GVRO can remove that danger quickly — and, in a crisis, may save a life. The strongest petitions are specific and corroborated: documented threats, messages, witnesses, prior incidents, police reports, and the statutory danger factors (§ 18155). We help families, employers, and others evaluate whether the facts meet the standard, obtain emergency and temporary orders, and carry the petition through the hearing — while being candid when a different tool (a welfare check, a mental-health hold, a DVRO) fits better.

[CTA] Worried someone with a firearm is a danger to themselves or others? Call (888) 808-2179, or Emergency Help— and call 911 if the danger is immediate.

Why GVRO cases are won or lost

• No significant danger shown. Ownership, anger, or an offensive post is not the same as a significant danger of personal injury (the clear-and-convincing standard exists for a reason).
• The petition is retaliatory. Filed for leverage in a divorce, custody, business, or neighbor dispute — and a knowingly false petition is a crime.
• Thin or stale evidence. The statute looks to recent threats and a 12-month pattern; old or vague allegations rarely carry the burden.
• The respondent didn’t show up. Default orders are how multi-year prohibitions get entered on one side’s account.
• A missed surrender deadline. Non-compliance creates a new crime and destroys credibility.
• An uncoordinated criminal case. Testifying in the GVRO without a Fifth Amendment plan hands the prosecution evidence.
• Overbreadth. A petition that sweeps further than the danger justifies invites a narrower order or termination.

What’s at stake: consequences of a GVRO

• Loss of all firearm rights for the term of the order — one to five years after a hearing — with surrender of every firearm within 24 hours.
• Loss of a CCW and entry into state firearm databases.
• A federal dimension to the prohibition while the order is in effect.
• Career consequences for those whose work requires firearms — peace officers, armed security, military and defense personnel, and federally licensed dealers — for whom a GVRO can be disqualifying.
• New criminal exposure for any violation (Pen. Code §§ 18205, 29825), which also extends the prohibition.
• A public record that can surface in background and licensing review.

Because the consequences fall hardest on people who own firearms lawfully, defending a GVRO correctly and on time is essential. → Restraining Order Violations

Gun violence restraining orders and firearm-dependent professions

A GVRO falls hardest on people for whom firearms are a livelihood or a lifelong, lawful pursuit. For these groups, the firm’s firearms-law fluency — not just restraining-order experience — is what protects the client.

GVROs and CCW holders

A concealed-carry weapon license cannot coexist with a gun violence restraining order. The moment a GVRO issues, the CCW is suspended and the holder must surrender firearms like anyone else. For responsible CCW holders — who have already cleared background checks and training — a GVRO can feel especially unjust, which is exactly why contesting the “significant danger” finding matters. Restoring a CCW means first defeating the petition at the hearing or terminating the order early (§ 18185), then navigating the licensing process. We defend CCW holders with their carry rights, not just their firearms, in view.

GVROs for peace officers and armed security

For peace officers, correctional staff, and BSIS-licensed armed security guards, a firearm is a job requirement — so a GVRO is not just a personal matter, it is a career threat. A prohibition can mean administrative leave, reassignment, or the end of a career, and it can intersect with POST and BSIS reporting and any internal-affairs inquiry. These cases must be defended with the professional consequences in view from day one.

GVROs for military and defense personnel and clearance holders

Active-duty service members, reservists, and defense contractors face an added layer: a GVRO can affect duty status, weapon qualification, and — critically — a security clearance. Because clearance adjudication weighs firearm prohibitions and the conduct behind them, a GVRO can have consequences that outlast the order itself. San Diego’s large military and defense community makes this a frequent, high-stakes scenario. → San Diego County

GVROs for collectors and federal firearms licensees (FFLs)

A serious collection turns the 24-hour surrender requirement into a logistical and financial problem: where do dozens or hundreds of firearms go, how are they valued, and how are they stored or transferred to a licensed dealer within the deadline? For FFLs, a GVRO can also implicate the license itself. Handling surrender correctly — on time, with a proper receipt, and without loss of valuable property — is its own task we manage for clients.

GVROs for hunters and sport shooters

You do not need a criminal history — or any history — to face a GVRO. A single reported statement, a misread comment, or a dispute with the wrong person can put years of lawful, peaceful ownership at risk. For hunters and sport shooters, the lesson is the same as for every gun owner: the protections the law provides only work for the respondent who responds, surrenders on time, and contests the danger finding with evidence.

Gun violence restraining orders throughout Southern California

We defend and pursue GVRO matters across Southern California. The red flag law is statewide, but GVRO petitions are filed and heard in the Superior Court for the county where the respondent lives, and local practice — how a bench weighs “significant danger,” how surrender is handled, how fast a hearing is set — varies. Because a GVRO so often overlaps a criminal case, knowing both the civil courthouse and the local criminal landscape matters.

Gun violence restraining orders in Los Angeles County

The nation’s largest court system hears GVRO matters across its many courthouses, from the Stanley Mosk Courthouse downtown to district courthouses including Long Beach, Chatsworth, Pasadena, and Compton. With the LAPD, the Sheriff’s Department, and dozens of municipal agencies, LA sees a high volume of law-enforcement GVRO petitions — and the parallel-criminal-case dynamic is constant. Local familiarity with both the civil bench and the surrounding criminal courts is a real advantage. → Los Angeles County

Gun violence restraining orders in Orange County

Orange County hears GVRO matters in its Superior Court, with the Central Justice Center in Santa Ana the county’s civil hub. Orange County is also where our firm tried — and won — the firearms restraining-order matters described above, in the Central and Lamoreaux courthouses. The county’s bench applies the clear-and-convincing standard rigorously. → Orange County

Gun violence restraining orders in Riverside County

Riverside County spans from the city of Riverside to the Coachella Valley, and GVRO matters are heard in its Superior Court across that footprint — downtown Riverside and desert-region courthouses. The county’s large law-enforcement presence and gun-owning population make red flag petitions a regular feature. → Riverside County

Gun violence restraining orders in San Bernardino County

The nation’s largest county by area hears GVRO matters across widely separated courthouses — the San Bernardino Justice Center, plus the Rancho Cucamonga and High Desert (Victorville) regions. Travel distance and venue make early planning important. → San Bernardino County

Gun violence restraining orders in San Diego County

San Diego County — home to a large military and defense community for whom firearm prohibitions carry career and clearance stakes — hears GVRO matters in its Superior Court, from the downtown Central courthouse to regional branches in Vista, El Cajon, and Chula Vista. → San Diego County

Gun violence restraining orders in Ventura County

Ventura County’s more centralized court system hears GVRO matters at the Ventura courthouse, serving the county’s coastal and inland communities — with the same statewide standard and surrender requirements. → Ventura County

Confirm your specific courthouse before filing or responding — routing and local practice change, and we handle that for our clients.

California red flag law: by the numbers

A few figures for context (full sourcing on our statistics pages).

Mass-shooting threats

Research from UC Davis’s Violence Prevention Research Program identified California’s red flag law being used in 58 cases involving threats of mass shootings in its early years (2016–2019) — evidence that, used appropriately, the law intervenes in genuinely dangerous situations.

How GVROs are used

The same research found that roughly 80% of GVROs were used in cases of threatened interpersonal violence, and that the large majority of early petitions came from law enforcement. A UC Davis review of the first three years (2016–2018) examined 413 orders issued statewide — a number that has grown substantially as the petitioner classes expanded.

Firearm surrender and enforcement

California actively enforces firearm prohibitions tied to court orders. In its 2023 Armed and Prohibited Persons System (APPS) report, the California DOJ reported seizing 1,443 firearms, and noted that people prohibited at least in part because of a restraining order made up over 50% of those disarmed through APPS efforts. The state’s GVRO 10-Year Progress Report (California DOJ) is the authoritative source for statewide GVRO counts.

(Figures current as of the cited reports — UC Davis VPRP studies, CA DOJ 2023 APPS report and GVRO 10-Year Progress Report; verify against the latest releases before publication.)

How a GVRO differs from other California orders

A GVRO is the only California order whose entire purpose is firearms. Others restrict contact and conduct (and also require firearm surrender); a GVRO restricts firearms, full stop.

GVRO vs. DVRO

→ Domestic Violence Restraining Orders

GVRO vs. WVRO and CHRO

→ Workplace Violence Restraining Orders · Civil Harassment Restraining Orders

GVRO vs. criminal protective order (CPO)

A GVRO is a civil firearm order; a CPO arises from a criminal case — and the two often run together over the same conduct.

→ Criminal Protective Orders

What we see in real GVRO cases

After handling restraining-order matters where firearm rights are on the line, the patterns are clear. The strongest petitions involve documented, recent, specific danger — a real threat, a pattern, a crisis. The weakest are built on an old grudge, a misread comment, or a dispute that has nothing to do with public safety. On the respondent side, the people who do best are the ones who surrender on time, stay silent where the criminal exposure requires it, and fight the “significant danger” question with evidence. The ones who do worst improvise — they violate the temporary order, they “explain” themselves into a criminal charge, or they don’t show up.

Common petitioner mistakes

• Using a GVRO as leverage in a divorce, custody, or business dispute — which can be a crime (§ 18200).
• Filing on stale or secondhand fear rather than recent, documented danger.
• Choosing the wrong tool — when a welfare check, a mental-health hold, or a DVRO fits better.
• Overreaching — asking for more than the danger justifies, inviting a narrower order.

Common respondent mistakes

• Missing the 24-hour surrender deadline — a new crime that extends the prohibition.
• Ignoring the papers — letting a five-year order enter by default.
• Testifying without a Fifth Amendment plan when a criminal case is live.
• Treating it as “just about the guns” — underestimating the career, clearance, and criminal stakes.
• Going in alone against a prepared law-enforcement petitioner.

When we advise against filing a GVRO

We tell would-be petitioners not to file when the facts don’t show a real, recent significant danger; when the motive is leverage rather than safety; or when another path — a welfare check, a § 5150 evaluation, a DVRO with firearm terms — better fits the situation. A denied or retaliatory petition can backfire badly.

When we tell respondents to settle

Not every GVRO should be fought to the end. Sometimes the right move is a time-limited, narrowed order or a negotiated resolution that gets a client to a faster restoration of rights without the risk of a five-year finding — especially when a parallel criminal case makes a contested hearing dangerous. We litigate when the facts support it and resolve when resolution protects the client.

Why clients hire our firm for gun violence restraining orders

A GVRO is where restraining-order law meets firearms law meets criminal defense — and few firms do all three. (Firm to supply verifiable figures; ensure State Bar Rules 7.1–7.5 compliance.)

• Firearms restraining orders tried and won — including the civil harassment matter above, where 40+ firearms were at stake and the order was denied after a five-day trial, and a DVRO defense where firearm rights were restored. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
• Criminal-defense firepower — as a d/b/a of Barhoma Law, P.C. (sister firm to Power Trial Lawyers), we coordinate the GVRO with any parallel criminal case, including criminal threats and firearm charges.
• Both sides — we defend respondents whose gun rights are at risk and assist families and employers who need to act. (We screen for conflicts; see how we represent both sides.)
• All six Southern California counties — Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura.
• [#]+ restraining-order hearings handled and [#] years of trial experience. [Recognition / reviews to be inserted.]

How The Restraining Order Law Firm helps — on both sides

We represent both respondents and petitioners in gun violence restraining order matters. For respondents, we protect your firearm rights, your CCW, your career, and your record — managing the surrender, fighting the “significant danger” question, and coordinating the Fifth Amendment posture with any criminal case. For petitioners, we help families and employers act quickly and responsibly when there is a real danger. (We screen every matter for conflicts and never represent both sides of the same dispute.) Because we are a d/b/a of Barhoma Law, P.C., our restraining-order work is backed by the firearms and criminal-defense experience of Power Trial Lawyers — the combination a GVRO demands.

Call (888) 808-2179 or request a free consultation.

Frequently asked questions

Your firearm rights — or someone’s safety — are on the line, and the timeline is measured in days. The side that walks in prepared, with counsel who understands both restraining orders and firearms law, has the advantage. Call (888) 808-2179 now for a free, confidential consultation, or request one online. We represent respondents and petitioners across all six Southern California counties.

The Restraining Order Law Firm is a d/b/a of Barhoma Law, P.C., and a sister firm to Power Trial Lawyers. This page is attorney advertising and general information, not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statutes, forms, durations, and case holdings change — verify all references with counsel before relying on them.