In re D.S. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES v. J.S.; R.S.
B301269
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE
Filed 11/18/20
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS. California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a). (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 19CCJP03268A-B)
Mitchell Keiter, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Objector and Appellant.
Janette Freeman Cochran, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Respondent.
J.S. (mother) appeals a three-year restraining order entered against her under
Facts
Mother and father were married in 2009, and they divorced in 2015. Son was born in March 2010 and daughter was born in September 2013.3 Mother and father shared custody of the children pursuant to a custody order that prevented mother from permitting contact between the children and her boyfriend, who was a registered sex offender with a 2016 conviction for lewd or lascivious acts with a minor (
On May 8, 2019, the children were at mother‘s home, and father learned that mother‘s boyfriend was present. Father drove his motorcycle to mother‘s home, and his girlfriend followed with a car. When father arrived, he started filming. Mother‘s boyfriend was in his car talking to mother, and father stated to them that the boyfriend was not supposed to be within 100 yards of the children, so father would be taking the children. The boyfriend responded, “Take the kids. What do we care?” Then mother said, “You‘re going to take the kids? You‘re going to take the f—ing kids? Go take the kids.” Mother ran to Father‘s
A social worker interviewed son and daughter separately on May 15, 2019, at their school. Son, who was in third grade, stated he knew why the social worker was there: because his mother had attacked his father. Son reported that mother hits him in the face when she is upset and has also hit him in the past with a remote control. He said mother calls him a “bitch” when she is cranky or mad, which happens a lot. When asked about thoughts of self-harm, son stated he hates himself and wants to die because things would be better if he was dead because his mother is mean to him and it makes him upset. Son also reported that mother would hit daughter, and pull or grab her by the ear. He said he feels safe with father and father‘s girlfriend. Daughter was in kindergarten in May 2019. When the social worker explained her role to daughter, daughter stated “Then you must be here because my mommy hits me all the time.” Daughter reported mother hits her every day, and that when daughter tells mother to stop hitting her, mother does not listen. Daughter also said that mother hits son in the face,
In later interviews in July 2019, son and daughter confirmed that mother slapped son during the May 8, 2019 incident. Son also said he was scared of mother because she is mean.
Procedural history
On May 16, 2019, father obtained a temporary restraining order (TRO) from a family law court protecting himself, his girlfriend, son, and daughter from mother. The TRO was valid until a hearing, scheduled for May 31, 2019.
On May 23, 2019, the Department filed a petition alleging mother placed the children at risk of physical harm, based on her conduct of striking son and allowing mother‘s boyfriend unlimited access to the children. At the initial hearing in the juvenile court on May 24, 2019, the court ordered the children detained from mother, and modified the TRO to allow mother to have monitored three-hour visits, three times a week. It also set a May 31, 2019 hearing on father‘s request for a permanent restraining order in the juvenile court.
Mother contends there is no substantial evidence to support the portion of the restraining order protecting the children. We disagree.
Relevant law and standard of review
“A restraining order under
Issuance of the restraining order does not require evidence of previous stalking, attacks, or infliction of physical harm; nor does it require evidence of a reasonable apprehension of future physical abuse. It is sufficient to show that the restrained person “disturb[ed] the peace” of the protected person. (
Mother argues that a course of conduct is necessary to support a restraining order, and that the facts of this case are more akin to those in In re C.Q. (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 355 and In re N.L. (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 1460, where the appellate court reversed portions of restraining orders protecting the minor children for lacking sufficient evidentiary support. First, we find no legal support for mother‘s argument that a restraining order is only warranted when a parent has engaged in a course of harmful or impermissible conduct, as opposed to a single incident. Second, the evidence here includes statements by the children that support an inference that mother has hit them on other occasions, in addition to hitting son in connection with mother‘s outburst against father on May 8, 2019. Lastly, the facts of In re C.Q. and In re N.L. are distinguishable from the facts of the current case. In In re C.Q., while there was evidence that the father had been
Here, there was substantial evidence to support the court‘s decision to include the children as protected persons in the restraining order. The juvenile court‘s order is certainly supported with sufficient “evidence that [mother] ‘disturbed the peace’ of [son and daughter].” (In re Bruno M., supra, 28 Cal.App.5th at p. 997.) Both son and daughter reported hitting or slapping by mother. Son, who was only nine years old at the time, said mother was often cranky or mad, and that she would call him a bitch and hit him on the face. Daughter reported that mother hit her every day; that mother would not listen when daughter told her to stop; and that daughter did not feel safe with her mother. On May 8, 2019, mother‘s anger resulted in violence directed toward father, his property, and mother hitting son. We therefore
DISPOSITION
The July 17, 2019 restraining order is affirmed.
MOOR, J.
We concur:
RUBIN, P. J.
KIM, J.