Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BQ019853 Rudolph A. Diaz, Judge.
Ivie, McNeill & Wyatt, Rupert A. Byrdsong and Charlie L. Hill for Defendant and Appellant.
Law Office of Darren S. Young and Darren S. Young for Plaintiff and Respondent.
MALLANO, Acting P. J.
Joel Ward appeals from a judgment enjoining him from harassing Tarshia Rodgers. He contends that the judgment was not supported by substantial evidence. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
In a request for an order for the prevention of domestic violence filed on June 6, 2007, Rodgers declared that she and Ward were in a relationship. In a section of the request captioned “History of Abuse,” Rodgers declared that Ward has “shaken [her] and pushed [her] around,” and that he threatened to use one of the two guns he owns to kill her and “will bury [her] in the desert.” In a section captioned “Recent Abuse,” Rodgers declared that on May 20, 2007, Ward punched her in the stomach; on June 3, at the church they both attended, Ward made a threat against her in front of others; and Ward also called her on the phone and left messages that he would kill Rodgers and himself.
The matter was tried to the court on June 28, 2007. Rodgers’s declaration was received in evidence. Testifying before the court, Rodgers stated that she had attended a church for the past 30 years, of which Ward had been the pastor for 10 years. She and Ward had been in a relationship for eight years. Their sexual relationship included consensual spanking. Ward had disclaimed the relationship in public. On May 20, 2007, Ward beat Rodgers, resulting in bruising. (Rodgers’s neighbor testified that Rodgers showed the bruising to the neighbor on that day.) Rodgers saw Ward on two separate occasions on May 20. On the second occasion they had consensual sex in his office.
Rodgers’s testimony continued that on May 24, 2007, she went to Ward’s house to take a pregnancy test in his presence. Upon hearing that Rodgers was pregnant, Ward said he would brand Rodgers’s “butt” with a hanger. “He was going to stick a hanger in the fire in the shape of an ‘O.’ ‘O’ is supposed to be significant of submissive women.” Ward “was sitting in a chair in the kitchen in front of a stove. He took the hanger apart and put the end part of the hanger into an ‘O,’ stuck it in the fire, and put me over his lap. I started fighting him. I said, ‘Let me go, let me go. I didn’t come here for this.’ He did let me up.”
Rodgers further testified that on May 25 Ward called her eight to ten times, stating that he would kill her and kill himself. In church the next Sunday, Ward told the congregation that Rodgers was claiming to be pregnant but he was not in love with her and did not intend to marry her. On Memorial Day weekend, Rodgers reported the abuse to a deacon at the church who is a police officer. She spoke to the deacon “[p]retty much for having [Ward] removed as the pastor of the church.”
For his part, Ward’s testimony included details of what he characterized as his and Roger’s “very aggressive sex life,” including tying each other up and using a “rough hand.” He was not aware of ever having inflicted bruises on Rodgers. As to Rodgers’s pregnancy, Ward told the congregation that he would “live up to [his] responsibility as far as the child is concerned if paternity is proved.” He did not remember Rodgers coming to his house on May 24, 2007, and denied that Rodgers had performed a pregnancy test in his house. Ward admitted he had been convicted of felony child abuse, explaining that he had spanked his son and was granted probation with the understanding that the case would be dismissed upon completion of a 52-week parenting class. At the time of trial he was serving his probationary period.
DISCUSSION
A person may seek a civil injunction if he or she has suffered harassment, which includes “unlawful violence, a credible threat of violence, or a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses the person . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 527.6, subd. (b).) “‘Credible threat of violence’ is a knowing and willful statement or course of conduct that would place a reasonable person in fear for his or her safety . . . .” (Id., § 527.6, subd. (b)(2).) “‘Course of conduct’ is a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose . . . .” (Id., § 527.6, subd. (b)(3).) The standard of proof for a civil injunction is clear and convincing evidence. (Id., § 527.6, subd. (d).)
Ward contends that the standard of proof was not met here. He argues Rodgers’s allegations of statements that he would kill her or himself did not constitute a credible threat because they “were not corroborated by any witness or evidence. Moreover, Ward’s testimony, which was unrefuted, established that certain conduct and language was a part of the sexual foreplay.” According to Ward, Rodgers’s credibility was further undermined because the incident Rodgers alleged to have occurred on May 24 was not included in Rodgers’s declaration regarding “Recent Abuse.” Ward also contends that the evidence was insufficient to show that Rodgers was seriously alarmed, annoyed, or harassed in that Rodgers voluntarily went to his office and engaged in sex with him on May 20, 2007.
“[Ward’s] argument in this regard appears to be little more than a concerted effort to have this court reweigh the evidence presented, something we may not do. [Citation.]” (Fresno County Dept. of Children & Family Services v. Superior Court (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 626, 646.) “A reviewing court applies the substantial evidence standard of review to a trial court’s factual findings, ‘regardless of the burden of proof at trial.’ [Citations.] Our sole inquiry is ‘whether, on the entire record, there is any substantial evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted,’ supporting the court’s finding. [Citation.] ‘We must accept as true all evidence . . . tending to establish the correctness of the trial court’s findings . . ., resolving every conflict in favor of the judgment.’ [Citation.]” (Sabbah v. Sabbah (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 818, 822–823.)
Almost all of Rodgers’s testimony conflicted with the testimony given by Ward. We have no basis upon which to question the trial court’s assessment of that testimony, which included Rodgers’s assertions and Ward’s denials of a beating that produced bruises on May 20 and the threat of “branding” on May 24. The court’s conclusion that the testimony satisfied the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6 and its issuance of an injunction on that basis must therefore be upheld.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: VOGEL, J., ROTHSCHILD, J.