In re H.D. CA4/1

── In re H.D. CA4/1 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: June 05, 2026 Category: General Filed 6/5/26 In re H.D. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In re H.D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. S.D. COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN D087487 SERVICES AGENCY, (Super. Ct. No. J521542) Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A.P., Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Alexander M. Calero, Judge. Affirmed. Jacob I. Olson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Damian M. Brown, County Counsel, Lisa M. Maldonado, Chief Deputy County Counsel, Katie Abajian, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.  I. INTRODUCTION A.P. (Mother) appeals the juvenile court’s visitation order, arguing the court abused its discretion in not ordering unsupervised visitation with then one-and-a-half-year-old H.D. (Child) at the six-month review stage of this dependency case. We conclude the court reasonably considered the totality of circumstances, including the nature of Child’s harm, Mother’s delayed engagement in services, and a new domestic violence incident, in finding that supervised visitation was in Child’s best interest. We affirm the order. II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Events Leading to the Petition Child came to the attention of the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) in September 2024 after Mother called the police to report that Child’s father (Father)1 had hit her on her head while she was holding Child, an infant at the time. According to the police report, Mother disclosed several prior unreported domestic violence incidents between her and Father. In January 2025,2 the Agency received a referral alleging that then six-month-old Child had bruising on his right cheek. Mother was unable to explain how the injuries occurred. In an interview with a social worker, Mother reported that Father hit her a few days earlier, causing a dark bruise and blood in the corner of her left eye. A medical examination of Child revealed he had previously sustained two bilateral skull fractures, a right 1 Because Father is not a party to this appeal, we discuss him only when relevant. 2 All dates herein are for the year 2025, unless otherwise specified. 2 femur fracture, and a left tibia fracture. Initially, the parents denied knowing how Child’s bruising or fractures occurred but later disclosed that Child had fallen off the bed three to six times. Parents also described a recent incident where, during an argument, Father pulled Child out of Mother’s arms and Mother pulled Child back. Doctors reported that bruising on children Child’s age was “incredibly rare” and concluded that Child’s injuries were indicative of multiple instances of physical abuse. Father was arrested for charges related to child abuse, and a criminal protective order (CPO) protecting Mother and Child from Father was issued. B. Petition and Detention Hearing On January 9, the Agency filed a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code3 section 300, subdivision (a), based on physical abuse. At the detention hearing, the juvenile court ordered Child detained. It further ordered voluntary services and separate, liberal, and supervised visitation f