Filed 10/26/18 In re C.T. CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Steven A. Mapes, Judge. Affirmed.

Michelle L. Jarvis, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Michelle D. Blakemore, County Counsel, and Pamela J. Walls, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant and appellant, K.T. (mother), appeals from the judgment entered after the juvenile dependency court found jurisdiction over her son, R.T., and daughter, C.T. (the twins), and ordered them removed from her care and placed with their father under family maintenance. Mother argues substantial evidence does not support the court taking jurisdiction over the twins. We conclude there was substantial evidence supporting the jurisdictional order and affirm the judgment.[1]

II.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. Circumstances Leading to the Twins’ Detention

Mother and father married in 2006. The twins were born in 2014. In 2016, mother and father separated. In June 2016, father filed a petition for dissolution. At the time of the instant juvenile dependency proceedings, mother had primary custody of the twins. Father paid mother spousal and child support, and was seeking full custody of the twins during the contentious pending dissolution proceedings.

Mother came to the attention of plaintiff and respondent, San Bernardino County Children and Family Services (CFS), plaintiff and respondent, on April 14, 2017, when mother called CFS and accused father of sexually abusing the twins. The twins were over two and a half years old at that time. That same day, CFS social workers, Monique Johnson and Charleena Chagoya, contacted mother at her home. Mother appeared at the door wearing a low-cut dress with her left breast exposed. While the twins napped on the living room couch, mother spoke to the social workers. She said father had visitation with the twins from Monday at 8:00 a.m. to Wednesday at 8:00 p.m. Father was a highway patrol officer and worked Thursday through Sunday.

Mother told the social workers that, before calling CFS, she called the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to inquire as to how she should report father because of the following circumstances: Father looked at pornography while the twins were home; C.T. had a rash on her bottom; the twins were aggressive with each other; C.T. put crayons in her vagina; and R.T. fondled his penis. Mother said that when she called the FBI, she was told she did not have any proof father was harming the twins and suggested mother take photographs of anything she believed was suspicious.

When the twins awoke from their naps, mother removed C.T.’s diaper and insisted the social workers look at C.T.’s bottom. The social workers observed that C.T. had a rash on her buttocks. Mother then let C.T. sit on the carpet without putting a new diaper on. One of the social workers told mother an appointment would be scheduled at the Children’s Assessment Center (CAC) for an examination. The social workers observed that there was little interaction between mother and the twins. Mother was intent on conveying a negative image of father as a parent. She reported that father was a sex addict. Mother said father watched pornography and participated in X-rated Web site activities. During the early part of their marriage, mother tried to make him happy by participating in Web cam activity. She eventually stopped because she was uncomfortable, but father continued it. He also went on adult Web sites but did not look at child pornography. When asked if mother thought father was sexually touching the twins, mother said, “‘No, I don’t think he would do anything like that.’”

Mother reported that the previous year, father put a gun in her face and she called the police. She claimed he was not arrested because he is a highway patrol officer, and the court dismissed the charges. When the social workers asked mother about any domestic violence between her and father, she said, “‘I’m going to act like this stuffed horse is me.’” Mother straddled a stuffed horse on the bed, raised her fist, and said father retracted his fist, as if he were going to hit her. She told him, “‘If you hit me, I’ll call the police and have you arrested. Instead he hit the pillow next to my head.’” Mother reported another incident in which she said she arrived home late after being out with girlfriends and father locked her out of the house. She called the police. When the police arrived, father said mother had a key and he denied locking the door. Then later that night father tortured her by preventing her from sleeping. Father turned the television up loud, left the lights on, and let the dog jump up and down on the bed. Mother was unable to provide any information as to when these incidents occurred.

Mother told the social workers she noticed the twins’ behavior changed whenever they returned from visiting their father. Mother said she disciplined the twins by making them spend time in their room for a few minutes. She reported that father hit the twins on the bottom with an open hand, over their diapers. Mother said there was an ex parte hearing scheduled in family court, because father was driving the twins when he lacked depth perception and he refused to show her an order from his doctor stating that he had full visual capacity. After the ex parte hearing, Johnson asked mother what had happened at the hearing. Mother said the court dismissed her complaint because father had a release from his doctor to drive. She said the family court judge scolded her for not simply asking father’s attorney for the doctor’s release. Johnson also asked mother if she had taken C.T. to the doctor for her diaper rash. Mother reported that she took C.T. to the emergency room and was told to go to urgent care. She waited at urgent care for hours and finally left before C.T. was seen by a doctor. Johnson told mother that the twins’ CAC medical examinations for the alleged sexual abuse (CAC examinations) were on April 25, 2017.

On April 21, 2017, mother called Johnson and reported that R.T. had fallen in the bathtub and had bruised his back. On April 24, 2017, Johnson called father and notified him of the twins’ CAC examinations on April 25, 2017. Father responded, “‘My wife is up to more of her antics.’” He said that the previous week, when she picked up the twins, C.T. had a diaper rash and he put diaper rash cream on it. Father also explained that he had eye surgery and afterwards, initially, he could not drive. Father also stated that the gun incident allegations were dismissed. Mother initially said father injured her but then admitted he did not.

On April 25, 2017, the twins had their CAC examinations. Father told the CAC examiner that he discovered the twins had bruises after mother turned the twins over to him the morning before their CAC examinations. The CAC examination reports state that the twins’ injuries and scars were likely caused by physical abuse. CAC Program Manager, Nancy Wolfe, called Johnson and reported that mother had caused a scene at the CAC office and was dressed inappropriately. Mother was told she should not be there and would have to leave. Because father’s visitation was that day, father had been told to take the twins to their CAC appointments.

The CAC examination reports stated R.T. had a one-centimeter abrasion on his neck; a small abrasion on his upper back; two small red bruises on his back; a grey bruise on his back; a seven-centimeter yellow and red bruise in the middle of his back; two small abrasions on the back of his right arm; one red-yellow bruise on the back of his left arm; a one-centimeter yellow bruise on the lower front of his right leg; a one-centimeter scar and abrasion on his right leg; and a four-centimeter linear red mark and small abrasion on the front of his upper left leg. As to C.T., the CAC examination reports stated she had a two-centimeter abrasion on the back of her shoulder; two small abrasions on her forearm; two one-centimeter abrasions on the front of her leg; a one-centimeter purple bruise and a small scar on her leg; and a three-centimeter linear abrasion on the side of her neck. Father was unable to explain how the twins sustained their injuries.

The CAC examination reports further stated father told the CAC examiner that, after he picked up the twins on Monday, April 24, 2017, the day before the twins’ CAC examinations, R.T. complained of back pain. Father lifted R.T.’s shirt and noticed R.T. had bruises on his back. C.T. also had a bruise on her shoulder. The CAC examiner concluded that the totality of R.T.’s injuries were out of proportion for his age. The examiner concluded there was a high suspicion of physical abuse based on this fact and the location of the injuries. The examiner was concerned C.T. was also physically abused because of her injuries, their unclear etiology, and the findings regarding R.T. The examiner further reported that sexual abuse could not be confirmed or negated as to either child.

On April 25, 2017, mother e-mailed Johnson screen shots of text messages between mother and her cousin, whom mother claimed worked for the FBI. The texted messages included mother’s statement, “‘It’s disgusting to me [that] I [have] to let my children be bait in order to have [father] investigated. It’s sad.’”

The day after the CAC examinations, Wolfe called Johnson, stating that she was very concerned about the twins returning home to mother that day. R.T. had multiple bruises on his back, ranging in size and color, and were very suspicious in nature. Wolfe said she believed the bruises could not have occurred while the twins were in father’s care, based on the color of the bruises and the fact that father picked up the twins the day before. She added that the twins were very comfortable with their father. A CAC therapist who observed the twins and their parents, reported that she noticed that R.T. would not go near his mother. The therapist further reported she also noticed father and the twins were appropriate with each other. The therapist voiced concerns about the twins returning home to mother that night.

On April 26, 2017, social workers Torres and Johnson made an unannounced visit to father’s home. Johnson observed the bruises on R.T.’s back. She also observed a bruise on C.T.’s right shoulder. Interaction between father and the twins was appropriate, and the twins did not appear to be afraid of him. When father said to the twins it was time to go to mother’s home, the social workers reportedly “observed the look of terror on the children’s faces and witnessed [R.T.] shaking his head no.”

Johnson consulted with supervising social worker Taylor regarding the concerns of Johnson, Torres, and the CAC staff. Johnson and Torres were extremely concerned about the twins’ reactions when father mentioned going to mother’s home. In accordance with Taylor’s instructions, Johnson told mother that it would be best to allow father to keep the twins in his care until completion of the investigations by CFS, the police, and the CAC, and until there was an explanation for the twins’ injuries. Johnson also informed mother that her explanation as to how R.T.’s injuries had occurred was inconsistent with the injuries. Mother replied, “‘Oh, okay.’”

On May 17, 2017, Johnson received the CAC’s forensic medical report stating that R.T.’s injuries were out of proportion in light of his age, and this, coupled with the location of the injuries, led to a high suspicion of physical abuse. The report further stated the origin of C.T.’s bruises and abrasions was unclear. There was concern C.T. was also physically abused, given the findings regarding R.T.

On May 22, 2017, the court issued a detention warrant, supported by an affidavit by Johnson, stating that there was probable cause to believe the twins may have suffered or were at substantial risk of suffering sexual abuse, serious physical or emotional harm or illness, and that leaving the twins in mother’s home risked future harm to the twins, thereby requiring issuance of the detention warrant and removal of the twins from her home.

2. Juvenile Dependency Petition

On May 25, 2017, CFS filed two juvenile dependency petitions on behalf of R.T. and C.T. (referred to collectively as the petition) under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a) (serious physical harm), (b)(1) (failure to protect), and (j) (abuse of sibling).[2] The petition alleged that, while in mother’s care or custody, R.T. and C.T. sustained bruises, abrasions, and scratches, which would not ordinarily have occurred but for mother’s unreasonable or neglectful acts or omissions. The petition also alleged that the twins suffered, or there was a substantial risk they would suffer, serious physical harm because of their parents’ failure to protect them. Mother allegedly failed to seek medical treatment for C.T., who suffered from a rash on her buttocks. Also, R.T. sustained injuries while in mother’s care. In addition, mother had mental health issues that prevented her from providing adequate care and supervision of the twins. The petition further alleged that each child was at risk of suffering serious physical harm while in mother’s care and custody because their sibling had been injured while in mother’s care and custody.

At the detention hearing on May 26, 2017, the court ordered the twins detained, with the twins remaining in the care of father. The court also ordered supervised visitation for mother once a week, for two hours, and reunification services. The court ordered family maintenance services for father.

3. Jurisdiction/Disposition Report

CFS reported in its jurisdiction/disposition report that social worker Maldonado interviewed father on June 8, 2017. Father said that he and mother have been engaged in an ongoing custody battle in family court during the past year. Father’s concern about mother’s behavior and parenting led to father contacting CFS, but nothing was done. Therefore, father did not call CFS again regarding future concerns. Father reported that mother developed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in 2010 after their home burned down. He also reported that mother had sent him text messages that the twins’ toys were talking to her, and R.T. was possessed. Mother was also paranoid about the government. At times mother admitted she needed help, but then said she did not. The family court requested an Evidence Code section 730 psychological evaluation (730 evaluation) but mother delayed appearing for the evaluation. Father said mother’s behaviors became more severe and frequent after the twins were born and after father filed for divorce in 2016.

Father believed mother was trying to make him look bad. Mother filed for a restraining order against him in family court. She testified father had scared her with a weapon, but during cross-examination, she recanted and said the incident did not happen as she had previously stated. Mother’s restraining order request was dropped. When father confronted mother about her alleged FBI cousin, she recanted by stating the FBI person was not her cousin. As to the twins’ bruises, father reported that he had seen bruises and marks on the twins every now and then but the supervision center, “‘Asante Family Services,’” told him they were not “concerning” so he did not worry about them until he recently saw the large bruise on R.T.’s back and other injuries. Father took the twins to their CAC examinations and CAC was concerned about the bruises. CAC said the color of the injuries was consistent with the twins sustaining the injuries while with their mother. Father stated that when he and mother lived together, mother hit the twins on the back of the leg. On one occasion, when C.T. was six months old, C.T. accidentally pulled mother’s hair. Mother grabbed C.T.’s hair and “‘pulled it to make her cry.’” Mother did this on several other occasions as well.

Father said mother had not worked for seven and a half years. Even though she was not working, mother wanted the twins in day care all day. She threatened father that if he did not put them in day care and work overtime to pay for it, she would divorce him. As a consequence, the twins were placed in day care. Father believed the twins did not have a close relationship with mother and did not want to see her. During father’s interview, while father was talking about mother, C.T. said, “‘[N]o mommy.’”

On June 9, 2017, social workers Maldonado and Korobashi interviewed mother. Mother was fixated on issues concerning father’s treatment toward her during the marriage. The social workers had to remind her that those were issues for family court. CFS’s concern was the twins’ safety. Mother stated she had not had custody of the twins since the day of the forensic medical examination.[3] She had only two supervised visits since then. Mother denied seeing any scars, bruises, or abrasions on the twins, with the exception of the bruise on R.T.’s back, which was sustained while he was taking a bath. R.T. attempted to get up and the bathtub faucet scraped his back, leaving a bruise with a small scratch.

Mother presented photographs of R.T., which were taken the Saturday before the twins left her care, but R.T.’s clothing covered the area where the injuries were. Mother also produced a photograph of the twins at a pool party but the areas where the twins sustained injuries were not visible. Mother showed a photograph of C.T.’s diaper rash, which mother believed was more than a rash. Mother reported to an FBI agent that C.T. put crayons in her vagina and anus, and R.T. was masturbating, because she believed this indicated someone was sexualizing or sexually abusing the twins. Mother, however, told Maldonado during her interview that she did not believe father sexually abused the twins but thought he could have “‘sexualized’” them, because he masturbated in the “‘cigar room,’” which does not have a door. During mother’s interview, she would frequently change the subject to complain about father and his “‘deviant’” sexual behavior or about the previous social worker.

Mother asserted that the information in the detention report was not correct. She also denied taking any medication for mental health problems. She acknowledged she was diagnosed with PTSD after her house “‘exploded’” in 2010, and previously took medication to calm her nerves after the explosion.

Mother said she had been the twins’ primary caregiver. She had 65 percent custody and father had 35 percent custody. Mother stated she used to spank the twins over their diapers but stopped when the twins were one and a half years old because it only reinforced the twins’ bad behaviors. She denied ever hitting them. CFS reported that mother had a history of mental health issues. She had exhibited bizarre behaviors and fixated on topics other than what her interview was intended to investigate. CFS concluded the twins’ injuries were sustained during mother’s care. CFS was extremely concerned mother would continue to involve the twins in her custody battle and place them in an unsafe situation, creating a risk of harm.

4. Jurisdiction/Disposition Hearing

During the jurisdiction/disposition hearing, which lasted four days, father, mother, mother’s friend Brian, and CFS social workers Johnson, Korobashi, Maldonado, and Chagoya, testified.

Korobashi testified mother’s visitation with the twins went very well, and mother was participating in therapy and parenting classes. Johnson testified the general neglect allegation as to mother was based on mother being more focused on father using pornography rather than on the twins. Mother made a CFS referral of sexual abuse, which she recanted and, instead of focusing on the twins, talked about father using pornography, unrelated to the twins.

Maldonado testified that father was concerned about mother’s mental health and described some of what he believed were “bizarre behaviors.” Maldonado discussed with mother the twins’ bruises. Mother told Maldonado R.T.’s bruise on his back was from the bathtub faucet. Mother denied causing any of the twins’ other marks or bruises and said she did not see them. Maldonado was concerned about mother’s mental health. Maldonado was not comfortable with mother having supervised visitation longer than twice a week for two hours a visit or one four-hour visit a week, because mother had not completed a 730 evaluation.

Father testified to the following: He contacted CFS when the twins were six months old because mother left the twins unattended while going out to get fast food. Mother sent him several text messages stating toys were talking to her and the toys’ eyes were glowing. On July 2, 2016, mother sent him a text message regarding demons. Another text message from her said she felt angel wings flapping against her face and angel tears on her face. Mother accused father of being possessed by demons and that demons “had it out for [R.T.].” During the six-month period before mother and father separated, mother called father several times and told him she heard noises in their home, which she believed was a demon knocking outside the door and shaking a rattler. Several times mother said she was going to admit herself into the psychiatric ward. Father strongly encouraged her to do so, but when he arranged for her to be admitted, she refused to follow through. After they separated, father called the authorities and requested a wellness check on her.

Father further stated that, during the three-month period before mother and father’s separation, mother stayed in bed and slept during the day and was up all night. At that time, the twins were one and a half years old. Mother called father at work several times and asked him to come home and take care of the twins because she was going to check herself into the psychiatric ward. Then she would call back and ask him to bring her dinner. Mother never told father she was going to kill herself but, in December 2013, she jumped out of a moving vehicle while they were driving on Highway 18. Father testified that the day before mother claimed he sexualized the twins, mother and father had been in family court for an emergency hearing, during which mother accused father of endangering the twins’ lives. She did not accuse him of sexualizing the twins at that time. Father did not notice any sexualized behavior while the twins were in his care. He never saw R.T. masturbate. Father acknowledged there was an incident when C.T. was three to five months old, when she played with her vagina with a crayon while in the bathtub and mother joked and laughed about it.

Father testified that, after he picked up the twins Monday morning, the day before the CAC examination, he noticed bruises on the twins when he got home and changed their diapers. The bruises appeared fresh. When he asked how they got bruised, the twins said, “‘Mommy.’” At their CAC examinations, the twins stayed away from mother for the most part and R.T. would not look at her.

Mother testified about another incident that occurred at Bass Lake in 2007. When she told father she wanted to leave because she was upset, father hit her in the breast area when attempting to prevent her from leaving. Mother left the cabin, walked around, and got lost. It was dark. A couple let her spend the night with them and in the morning they helped her find her way back to the cabin. She then drove home. In 2010, mother and father’s house exploded. It was believed there was a gas leak in the attic. After mother turned up the heater, the house blew up, causing the ceiling to fall on her. Mother had minor injuries but suffered from PTSD for a year and a half after the incident. Mother received therapy for six to nine months and took medication. She then stopped treatment because she believed she had learned all she could and did not need therapy any longer. Mother’s last panic attack was in 2012.

Mother further testified that on April 12, 2017, mother noticed C.T. had a rash, and two days later called CFS to make allegations against father. Mother thought C.T.’s rash did not look like a diaper rash. C.T. was never seen by a doctor for the rash. On April 20, 2017, mother filed an ex parte family court emergency petition because father had had eye surgery. Mother believed he was unable to drive because he would not provide her with a release showing her that he could drive. Also, according to mother, R.T. injured his back when mother was giving him a bath and he jumped up and hit his lower back on the bathtub faucet. On Sunday, April 23, 2017, mother and her friend Brian took the twins to House of Play, an indoor playhouse for children. She was unaware of the twins doing anything that would have caused them to be injured. Before the twins went there, she did not notice any bruising on the twins, other than the bruise on R.T.’s lower back. Mother also did not notice any bruising on the twins, other than R.T.’s back bruise, when mother turned the twins over to father Monday morning, on April 24, 2017.

With the exception of R.T.’s back bruise, mother was unable to explain why the twins had so many bruises, abrasions, and scars at the time of their CAC examinations. She concluded the CAC examinations were incorrect. Mother testified she had never used corporal punishment but later stated that she used to spank the twins but stopped because it did not do any good. She stated that father would spank the twins.

Brian testified that he, mother, and the twins went to a pool party on Saturday, April 22, 2017, during which he saw the twins undressed after swimming. He did not see any bruising on the twins, other than R.T.’s back bruise from R.T. injuring himself in the bathtub. Brian said the next day he went to the House of Play with mother and the twins. He did not see the twins fall and injure themselves there. Brian also did not see any bruising on the twins, other than R.T.’s back bruise, after they returned home that evening from the House of Play.

Mother submitted at trial a medical report dated August 3, 2017, by Dr. Hyman, who was retained by mother. Dr. Hyman did not examine the twins. However, he reviewed the CAC examination reports, various relevant juvenile dependency documents, photographs, and other evidence related to the juvenile dependency proceedings. Dr. Hyman concluded in his report that the twins “did not have bruises or other traumatic cutaneous lesions outside the spectrum of that which would be expected in non-abused children seen in a clinical pediatric practice.” He further stated that “[t]here is no clear or convincing scientific evidence that either child in this case was physically abused.” Dr. Hyman noted that “[i]t would be important to verify—to whatever extent possible—the psychosocial problems alleged by both parents and to factor those realities into any further social service assessments or plans.”

Dr. Hyman further found in his report that “[n]one of [R.T. and C.T.’s] cutaneous findings exceed the spectrum of bruising normally seen in their age group. Minor bruising in mobile children is neither pathognomonic of nor highly specific for child abuse.” He further stated that there was no way of determining whether the twins’ bruises were caused by child abuse, because there had not been any testing done to exclude transient causes of easy bruising. Dr. Hyman therefore stated in his report that “[i]t is not possible to conclude with any degree of certainty that the children’s bruises were intentionally inflicted.” Dr. Hyman concluded that it was his medical opinion, “based upon the records that [he] received, that there is no definitive scientific evidence supporting a diagnosis of physical abuse in the case of [C.T. and R.T.].”

Mother also submitted as evidence a report entitled family court services child custody recommending counseling report dated July 11, 2016. The report was based on a family court services counselor interviewing mother and father separately on July 11, 2016. The counselor reported that father was seeking sole physical custody of the twins because he believed mother suffered from significant mental health issues that impair her ability to care for the twins. Father requested that visits by mother be supervised. Mother was also requesting sole physical custody of the twins, with father receiving supervised visits. Mother claimed father had inflicted domestic violence upon her throughout their marriage. Mother denied she had mental health issues and father denied he had perpetrated domestic violence.

During father’s interview, he described mother’s odd behaviors and text messages that indicated she had mental health issues. Mother stated during her interview that she was depressed because of significant marital abuse she endured over the past 10 years. Mother accused father of being a sex addict. Mother further believed father made poor decisions, which she said supported the notion he may be possessed by a demon. She claimed father was trying to make her look crazy because his job was in jeopardy as a result of the gun-related incident she reported against him and related restraining order. The counselor concluded in her report that, given the safety concerns regarding both parents, mother and father should complete a 730 evaluation for purposes of the court determining custody and visitation.

During the continued jurisdiction/disposition hearing on October 4, 2017, the court adopted the modified findings and orders in the jurisdiction/disposition report dated June 15, 2017, and declared the twins’ dependents of the court under section 300, subdivisions (b) and (j). The court further ordered the twins removed from mother under section 361, subdivision (c), and ordered the twins to remain in father’s care, under the supervision of CFS. The court ordered visitation for mother continued, as previously ordered, authorized reunification services for mother, and ordered family maintenance services for father. The court also authorized a 730 evaluation for mother.

When making its findings, the court stated that it was not considering mother’s PTSD diagnosis and the Bass Lake incident because they were not significant. The court found that mother’s obsession with father’s behavior endangered the twins because she was not attentive to the twins. This lack of focus on the twins may have led to the twins sustaining their numerous injuries. The court also noted that there was evidence mother had sent text messages reflecting very “bizarre behavior” and had engaged in “histrionic behavior.” This concerned the court regarding mother’s mental health, but for disposition purposes, the court first needed mother evaluated to determine if she had a mental illness and needed treatment. The court therefore did not make a finding on Mother’s mental health condition.

III.

SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

Mother contends there was insufficient evidence to support the juvenile court taking jurisdiction over the twins under section 300, subdivisions (b)(1) and (j).

1. Standard of Review

“In a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support a jurisdictional finding, the issue is whether there is evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted, to support the finding. In making that determination, the reviewing court reviews the record in the light most favorable to the challenged order, resolving conflicts in the evidence in favor of that order, and giving the evidence reasonable inferences. Weighing evidence, assessing credibility, and resolving conflicts in evidence and in the inferences to be drawn from evidence are the domain of the trial court, not the reviewing court. Evidence from a single witness, even a party, can be sufficient to support the trial court’s findings.” (In re Alexis E. (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 438, 450-451 (Alexis E.).)

2. Jurisdiction Based on Unexplained Multiple Injuries

The juvenile court found jurisdiction based on subdivisions (b)(1) and (j) of section 300. Subdivision (b)(1) encompasses a child who “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 . . . to adequately supervise or protect the child, or the willful or negligent failure of the child’s parent . . . to adequately supervise or protect the child from the conduct of the custodian with whom the child has been left, or by the willful or negligent failure of the parent . . . to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment, or by the inability of the parent . . . to provide regular care for the child due to the parent’s . . . mental illness.”

Subdivision (j) applies to a child whose sibling has been abused or neglected, as defined in subdivision (b), and there is a substantial risk that the child will be abused or neglected. “The court shall consider the circumstances surrounding the abuse or neglect of the sibling, the age and gender of each child, the nature of the abuse or neglect of the sibling, the mental condition of the parent or guardian, and any other factors the court considers probative in determining whether there is a substantial risk to the child.” (§ 300, subd. (j).)

In the instant case, the juvenile court found true the petition allegations that the twins were injured, or at risk of being injured, while in mother’s care and C.T. had an untreated rash. The court also found that, although there was evidence mother may have suffered from mental health illness, there was no current diagnosis. The court therefore concluded that the evidence was insufficient for the court to make a finding as to her mental health condition.

When the dependency petition alleges multiple grounds for asserting that a minor comes within the dependency court’s jurisdiction, this court can affirm the juvenile court’s finding of jurisdiction if any one of the statutory bases for jurisdiction that are enumerated in the petition is supported by substantial evidence. (Alexis E., supra, 171 Cal.App.4th at p. 451.) In such a case, this court need not consider whether any of the other alleged statutory grounds for jurisdiction are supported by the evidence. (Id. at pp. 450-451.) Here, there was sufficient evidence to support the court’s finding under section 300, subdivision (b)(1) (failure to protect) based on the twins’ multiple injuries.

Mother argues that evidence of the twins’ injuries was insufficient to support jurisdiction. She asserts that there was substantial evidence that the twins did not get their bruises while in her care, and little, if any, evidence the injuries were the result of neglect or abuse by mother. Mother relies on Brian’s and her own statements and testimony, and other evidence, including photographs and Dr. Hyman’s report. Mother attempts to denigrate the CAC examination reports by arguing that the CAC was not informed that the twins were at a pool party and the House of Play a few days before their CAC examinations, and R.T.’s lower back bruise was caused by bumping into the bathtub faucet. Mother also argues R.T.’s distressed reaction to father telling him to get ready to go to mother was a “set up” and not reliable, because it was only 3:00 p.m. and the exchange of the children was not until 8:00 p.m. Mother maintains father made the statement, “‘[l]et’s get ready to go to mommy,’” in front of the social worker “for show.”

Mother argues the twins’ injuries could have happened while the twins were with father, because there is no evidence of what happened to the twins during the 29 hours they were with father before their CAC examinations. Mother also argues Dr. Hyman’s report states that the twins’ injuries were not outside the spectrum of that which nonabused children in the twins’ age group might sustain. Dr. Hyman further states there is no scientific evidence that the injuries occurred in mother’s care, rather than while the twins were with father, or that the twins were at risk of neglect or serious physical harm while in mother’s care.

We reject mother’s contention there was insufficient evidence. We conclude substantial evidence supports the court’s finding that placing the twins with mother would expose them to risk of serious harm. When social workers responded to mother’s call accusing father of sexually abusing the twins, mother appeared at the door with her left breast exposed. After taking C.T.’s diaper off to show the social worker what mother believed was a suspicious rash, mother left C.T. on the carpet without a diaper. In addition, contrary to mother’s CFS referral call accusing father of sexually abusing the twins, mother recanted the allegations to the responding social workers. Mother further recanted her allegations and charges that father put a gun in her face. The charges were dismissed after mother denied in court that the incident occurred.

As to the twins’ numerous bruises and abrasions (14 for R.T., 10 for C.T.), father did not discover them until mother dropped off the twins the Monday morning before the CAC examinations. Evidence of the circumstances of the twins’ injuries, the likelihood the injuries were sustained while in mother’s care, and mother’s histrionic odd behaviors and mental health issues supported the juvenile court’s finding that leaving the twins in mother’s custody and care would subject the twins to risk of neglect or serious physical harm. After the CAC examinations, the program manager of CAC informed CFS that she was concerned about the twins returning to mother because of R.T.’s multiple bruises, and the twins’ uncomfortableness around mother. In response, a social worker visited the twins at father’s home and observed the twins’ multiple bruises and abrasions, and noticed the twins appeared terrified when father said they were going to mother’s home. R.T. shook his head no. CFS asked mother to explain how the injuries occurred and concluded mother’s explanation was inconsistent with the nature of the injuries. CFS was also concerned about the twins going to mother and therefore told mother the twins would stay with father until completion of the investigation. In addition, father testified and stated during his CFS interview that mother hit the twins on the back of their legs, and, more than once, pulled C.T.’s hair when she was six months old in response to C.T. pulling mother’s hair.

The CAC examination reports, CFS reports, and CFS social workers’ testimony also supported the trial court’s jurisdiction ruling the twins had suffered, or there was a substantial risk that they would suffer, serious physical harm as a result of the failure or inability of mother to adequately supervise and protect the twins. While this finding and supporting evidence was alone sufficient to support jurisdiction over the twins, there was also supporting evidence indicating mother suffered from mental health issues. The court determined that it could not make a finding as to mother’s mental health, and evidence of mother’s mental instability was not dispositive but troubling. The court concluded that further investigation as to mother’s mental health was required, including ordering mother to undergo a psychological examination.

Evidence mother suffered from mental illness that interfered with her ability to adequately care for the twins and placed them at risk of harm included CFS reports, text messages, and testimony. Father stated during his CFS interview and trial testimony that mother sent him text messages that the twins’ toys were talking and their eyes glowed, and R.T. was possessed. Father testified mother did not seem interested in the twins. Before mother and father separated, mother demanded the twins be placed in day care, even though mother was not working. Mother testified and stated during her CFS interview that she suffered from PTSD after the family home exploded in 2010 (before the twins were born). Mother believed she had fully recovered and therefore was no longer taking medication for PTSD. Maldonado reported in the jurisdiction/disposition report that she believed mother had a history of mental health issues and might have current mental health issues. Concerns regarding mother’s mental health were also raised in the family court dissolution proceedings. A therapist, who interviewed mother and father in July 2016, reported that she had significant concerns regarding mother’s mental stability. The report was filed in connection with father’s ex parte petition to place the twins with him because of concerns that mother was mentally unstable. The therapist concluded both parents should undergo a 730 evaluation for purposes of determining custody and visitation.

This evidence was sufficient to support the juvenile court’s determination that leaving the twins in mother’s care and custody would place the twins at risk of serious harm. Weighing evidence, assessing credibility, and resolving conflicts in evidence and in the inferences to be drawn from evidence is beyond the domain of this court. (Alexis E., supra, 171 Cal.App.4th at pp. 450-451.) We therefore conclude, based on the totality of the evidence, that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the twins removed from mother’s custody and ordering jurisdiction over them under section 300, subdivisions (b)(1) and (j).

IV.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

CODRINGTON

J.

We concur:

RAMIREZ

P. J.

MILLER

J.