In re R.A. CA2/2, B307323

Department received referral after Feb 11, 2020 incident where father allegedly strangled and punched mother, pushed her into street near a stroller; M.B. was reported present; mother had visible injuries.
Police and maternal grandmother corroborated at least some violence; father had prior incidents (Oct 2019 bat assault with R.A. present) and criminal history for domestic violence.
Mother repeatedly denied domestic violence, continued contact with father (including overnight stays), and resisted cooperating fully with the Department; mother completed unapproved online classes only.
Children were removed and placed separately (R.A. with presumed father Timothy; M.B. in Department care); Department filed a section 300 petition under subdivisions (a) and (b).
At the jurisdiction/disposition hearing the juvenile court found mother not credible, sustained the section 300(a) and (b) allegations, declared the children dependent, and ordered removal and services; mother appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether substantial evidence supported jurisdiction under W&I §300(a) and (b) based on domestic violence and mother's failure to protect	Multiple violent incidents (Oct 2019, Feb 2020, May 2020) including children present or nearby; mother denied abuse and continued contact with father, increasing recurrence risk	Insufficient evidence: children not actually harmed; some incidents not witnessed by both children; reliance on prior incidents alone is inadequate (relies on In re J.N.)	Affirmed. Substantial evidence supports jurisdiction: history of severe domestic violence, children present or at risk, and mother’s denial/continued contact justified court protection.
Whether removal under W&I §361(c) was justified	Removal necessary because return posed substantial danger given repeated domestic violence, mother’s lack of protective action, and failure to complete approved programs	Removal unnecessary; mother had completed some classes and father was incarcerated at times	Affirmed. Same evidence supporting jurisdiction supported removal: parental inability to protect and potential detriment warranted removal.

In re T.V., 217 Cal.App.4th 126 (2013) (past parental conduct can predict future risk)
In re Heather A., 52 Cal.App.4th 183 (1996) (court may act before actual harm occurs where risk exists)
In re I.J., 56 Cal.4th 766 (2013) (standard of review for jurisdictional findings)
In re V.L., 54 Cal.App.5th 147 (2020) (parental denial of domestic violence increases recurrence risk)
In re A.F., 3 Cal.App.5th 283 (2016) (denial relevant to likelihood of behavior modification without supervision)
In re J.N., 181 Cal.App.4th 1010 (2010) (distinguishable authority involving single-incident parental misconduct)
In re D.D., 32 Cal.App.5th 985 (2019) (removal requires parental inability to provide proper care and potential detriment)
In re Hailey T., 212 Cal.App.4th 139 (2012) (standard for reviewing dispositional orders)