Can a restraining order be found to have been granted because of the fact that appellant was not in his right mind at the restraining order hearing?

^3. Appellant also argues, for the first time on appeal, that "[Orozco's] testimony that appellant was not in his right mind at the restraining order hearing" calls into question whether appellant was capable of meaningfully participating in the hearing and is another factor demonstrating "that it cannot be said, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the order was lawfully issued." Appellant has forfeited this issue due to his failure to raise it in the trial court. (See People v. Williams (1997) 16 Cal.4th 153, 250 [constitutional issue raised for first time on appeal was waived].)