Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Hideo Chino, Commissioner, Super. Ct. No. J516700
NARES, Acting P. J.
Jessica Z. and Joshua C. (together the parents) appeal jurisdictional and dispositional orders declaring their daughter, Serenity C., a dependent child of the juvenile court and placing her in foster care. The parents contend the court erred in assuming jurisdiction because the evidence was insufficient to show Serenity was at substantial risk of harm at the time of the hearing. Jessica additionally asserts the evidence was insufficient to support the finding it was necessary to remove Serenity from her custody, and there were reasonable alternatives to removal. Joshua joins her arguments. We affirm the orders.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On May 29, 2007, the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (the Agency) petitioned on behalf of infant Serenity under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b), alleging she was at substantial risk because of domestic violence between her parents and Joshua's history of domestic violence, drug use and a mental disorder. The petition also alleged the parents remained in contact with each other.
One month before Serenity's birth, when Jessica was eight months pregnant, Joshua hit and choked Jessica and rammed her abdomen with his body. Jessica drove herself to the hospital with a bruised and bleeding face. She told hospital personnel she was afraid to go home. However, after the incident she returned to her grandfather's home, where Joshua was present. She told the social worker she was not at risk from Joshua any more because he was no longer using drugs.
The social worker reported that when she interviewed Joshua, he rambled, made disjointed statements and jumped from topic to topic. He had earlier admitted having a bipolar disorder, but denied this to the social worker. He had been abused as a child, said he was on criminal probation and admitted he began using methamphetamine and crack cocaine when he was 12 years old. He had a history of domestic violence, and child protective services had been involved with him and his former wife and their children in Riverside County. The court made a prima facie finding on the petition and ordered Serenity detained out of the home.
The social worker reported that Jessica entered a domestic violence shelter after Serenity's birth. The social worker there said after a "rocky start . . . [Jessica had] made a complete turnaround and [had] voiced on many occasions that her priority is reunifying with her daughter." The social worker at the shelter had first expressed concern that Jessica was leaving the shelter during the day without explanation. However, Jessica then began attending domestic violence classes regularly and was receptive to treatment.
In July 2007 the social worker reported Joshua had called her to say that strange things had been happening to him and men had been following and threatening him. He denied being under the influence of any substance. He reported Jessica had cooked dinner for him on June 12. He said that evening he lost his temper, punched a wall and broke his hand, and Jessica drove him to the hospital. The hospital confirmed Joshua had been there that day, but Joshua later denied the incident had happened. He said he and Jessica were trying to work things out, and he was attending a drug treatment program. The paternal grandfather reported Jessica and Joshua had come to his home in mid-June, and Joshua stayed there with him while Jessica and her grandfather went to visit Serenity. He said they later returned to pick up Joshua and then all three drove away together. Jessica's grandfather verified this account and said he and Jessica had given Joshua a ride to Joshua's grandfather's home that day. Jessica, however, denied seeing Joshua any time after he left the hospital after Serenity's birth. On July 10 Joshua was arrested near the domestic violence shelter. Jessica said he had been stalking her and he had threatened to shoot her. On July 10 she obtained a temporary restraining order against him.
At the jurisdictional hearing on July 17 and 18, 2007, Jessica testified about the domestic violence incident in April and about an earlier incident, but denied there had been any other incidents of violence. She explained Joshua knew where the domestic violence shelter was because he had been to the shelter when she stayed there for one day after the April incident. Jessica testified she left the shelter during the day, sometimes to go to her grandfather's home, and on one occasion she had contact with Joshua when she went to visit his grandfather. She denied riding in a car with Joshua or cooking dinner for him and said the grandfathers must be lying when they told the social worker that she and Joshua had ridden to Joshua's grandfather's home in her grandfather's car.
The social worker testified Jessica had made progress in services, but the social worker believed that Serenity was at risk in her care because Jessica did not completely understand how to protect herself and Serenity and she had had recent contact with Joshua. She said the risk was high because Jessica did not immediately enter the shelter after the domestic violence incident, the incident was very severe, and when Jessica left the shelter, her whereabouts were unknown. She said both Jessica's and Joshua's grandfathers reported Jessica and Joshua had remained in contact after Serenity's birth. The social worker said Jessica had been receiving treatment for only a short time and Joshua remained untreated. She was concerned Jessica would allow Joshua to have access to Serenity if Serenity were placed with her.
The court found the allegations of the petition true, declared Serenity a dependent child and removed her from parental custody, finding reasonable efforts had been made to prevent the removal.
DISCUSSION
I. Substantial Evidence to Support Jurisdiction
The parents contend there was not sufficient evidence for the court to assume jurisdiction over Serenity.
A. Authority
A reviewing court must uphold a juvenile court's findings and orders if they are supported by substantial evidence. (In re Amos L. (1981) 124 Cal.App.3d 1031, 1036-1037.) Determinations of credibility of witnesses and resolutions of conflicts in the evidence are for the trier of fact. (In re Tanis H. (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1218, 1226-1227.) "[W]e must indulge in all reasonable inferences to support the findings of the juvenile court [citation], and we must also '. . . view the record in the light most favorable to the orders of the juvenile court.' " (In re Luwanna S. (1973) 31 Cal.App.3d 112, 114, quoting In re Biggs (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 337, 340.) The appellant bears the burden to show the evidence is insufficient to support the court's findings. (In re Geoffrey G. (1979) 98 Cal.App.3d 412, 420.)
Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b) provides that a child may be adjudged a dependent child of the court under the following circumstances:
"The child has suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm or illness, as a result of the failure or inability of his or her parent or guardian to adequately supervise or protect the child . . . or by the inability of the parent or guardian to provide regular care for the child due to the parent's or guardian's mental illness, developmental disability, or substance abuse."
A juvenile court is not required to wait until a child is actually hurt before it assumes jurisdiction. (In re Diamond H. (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 1127, 1136, disapproved on other grounds in Renee J. v. Superior Court (2001) 26 Cal.4th 735, 748, fn. 6.) The focus of the statute is to avert harm to the child. (In re Jamie M. (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 530, 536.)
B. Application
Sufficient evidence supports the allegations of the petition that Serenity was at substantial risk because there had been severe domestic violence between the parents when Jessica was eight months pregnant with Serenity, Joshua had a mental disorder and abused drugs, and the parents continued to have contact. Jessica testified that during the incident Joshua bruised her neck, scratched her face and would not let her leave for more than four hours. After this serious abuse, Jessica said she was afraid to go home because she was frightened of Joshua, yet one day after the incident she returned to the home she shared with Joshua and her grandfather. We reject Jessica and Joshua's suggestion that Serenity was not at risk because the severe domestic violence incident occurred before her birth. The evidence indicated the substantial risk continued because Jessica had remained in contact with Joshua.
After Serenity was born, Joshua was confrontational with Jessica at the hospital. The social worker was concerned about his mental health because he rambled from topic to topic and had mood swings. The social worker counseled Jessica that it was dangerous for her and Serenity to have contact with Joshua because he had not received treatment. Although Jessica entered a domestic violence shelter, it appeared she continued to have contact with Joshua. Joshua's grandfather reported Jessica and Joshua continued to see each other. He told the social worker that in mid-June, Jessica, Joshua and Jessica's grandfather came to his home and left Joshua there while Jessica and her grandfather went to visit Serenity. He said that after the visit, they returned and picked up Joshua and all three happily left together. Jessica's grandfather agreed he and Jessica had provided a ride to Joshua that day. In addition, Joshua somehow had obtained the confidential address of the shelter where Jessica was living. He went to the shelter and was arrested there. Also, he told the social worker that Jessica had cooked dinner for him one night, he had gotten angry and punched a hole in a wall, and Jessica had driven him to a hospital for treatment.
At the time of the hearing, Jessica had begun domestic violence treatment, but she had been in the program for only one month. Joshua had not had treatment for his drug addiction or treatment to prevent further violence. Although Joshua was incarcerated at the time of the hearing, the evidence indicated Jessica had remained in contact with him after Serenity's birth, and it was reasonable to conclude that she had not ended their relationship. The social worker opined Serenity would be at substantial risk in Jessica's care. The court was entitled to rely on the social worker's opinion. (See In re Beatrice M. (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1411, 1420-1421.)
Substantial evidence supports the court's finding that the allegations of the petition were true.
II. Substantial Evidence to Support Removal
Jessica contends there was not sufficient evidence to support the order removing Serenity from her care.
A. Authority
A child may not be removed from a parent's custody under Welfare and Institutions Code section 361, subdivision (c)(1) unless the court finds by clear and convincing evidence:
"There is or would be a substantial danger to the physical health, safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being of the minor if the minor were returned home, and there are no reasonable means by which the minor's physical health can be protected without removing the minor from the minor's parent's . . . physical custody."
B. Application
Substantial evidence supports the order removing Serenity from Jessica's custody. Jessica had suffered severe abuse at Joshua's hands when she was pregnant with Serenity, and Joshua remained untreated for his drug addiction and mental illness. Jessica had begun treatment to learn how to protect herself from domestic violence, but the evidence indicated she had continued to have contact with Joshua after Serenity's birth. Substantial evidence supports a finding that Serenity would be in substantial danger in Jessica's custody and there were no reasonable means to protect her without removal.
DISPOSITION
The orders are affirmed.
WE CONCUR: McDONALD, J., IRION, J.