In Re Term of Parental Rights as to A.C.

── In Re Term of Parental Rights as to A.C. ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: May 14, 2026 Category: General NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE IN RE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.C. No. 1 CA-JV 25-0191 FILED 05-14-2026 Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. JD45137, JS22562 The Honorable Joan M. Sinclair, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL David W. Bell, Attorney at Law, Higley By David W. Bell Counsel for Appellant Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Tucson By Jennifer R. Blum Counsel for Appellee Department of Child Safety Maricopa County Office of the Legal Advocate, Phoenix By Amanda Adams Counsel for Appellee A.C.  IN RE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.C. Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma and Judge Andrew J. Becke joined. C A T T A N I, Judge: ¶1 Arqusha C. (“Mother”) appeals the superior court’s order terminating her rights to her child A.C. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 A.C. was born in August 2024.1 In June 2025, an unknown woman dropped him off at the hospital with visible injuries, claiming that she found the child on a trail. A.C. was diagnosed with severe injuries including a traumatic brain injury, skull fracture, injuries to his frenulum, brain bleeding that led to seizures, bruising on both eyelids, and abrasions on his ears and nose. The injuries were described as “non-accidental” and required follow-up treatment. ¶3 Mother arrived at the hospital several hours later. She claimed that A.C. had fallen off a bed earlier that day and that she was with a friend when she noticed swelling on A.C.’s head. Mother said that she did not want to be the person to take A.C. to the hospital because she was embarrassed and did not want the child to be taken away from her. ¶4 Mother likewise told police that A.C. fell off the bed, but she later asserted that he had fallen and hit his head on the carpeted floor while she was attempting to place him in his baby carrier. She denied harming A.C. and noted that he had several accidental falls in the prior months. Mother claimed that she noticed A.C.’s head swelling while they were riding the bus to the mall, and she arranged for an unidentified adult to drop A.C. off at the hospital. ¶5 Mother had four other children. Her oldest child is deceased, and the other children have lived with out-of-state relatives. One of 1 Mother has not identified A.C.’s father, and he is not a party to this appeal. 2  IN RE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.C. Decision of the Court Mother’s other children was removed from her care due to a brain bleed and a burn, which Mother asserted was caused by a bug bite. ¶6 The Department of Child Safety (“DCS”) took temporary custody of A.C. while he was in the hospital, then placed him with a licensed foster family. In July 2025, DCS petitioned to terminate the relationship between Mother and A.C. on the grounds that Mother neglected or abused A.C.2 See A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(2). ¶7 The court held a contested dependency and severance adjudication in October 2025. Finding that Mother had abused and neglected A.C., the court terminated the parent–child relationship. See A.R.S. §§ 8-201(2)(a), (25)(a), -533(B)(2). ¶8 Mother timely appealed, and we have jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 8-235(A). DISCUS