Rodgers v. Ward



Filed 5/27/08 Rodgers v. Ward CA2/1



NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.



IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA



SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION ONE

TARSHIA RODGERS,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

JOEL ANTHONY WARD,

Defendant and Appellant.
B201853

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. BQ019853)



APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Rudolph A. Diaz, Judge. Affirmed.



Ivie, McNeill & Wyatt, Rupert A. Byrdsong and Charlie L. Hill for Defendant and Appellant.



Law Office of Darren S. Young and Darren S. Young for Plaintiff and Respondent.



______________________________________



Joel Ward appeals from a judgment enjoining him from harassing Tarshia Rodgers. He contends that the judgment was not supported by substantial evidence. We affirm.



BACKGROUND



In a request for an order for the prevention of domestic violence filed on June 6, 2007, Rodgers declared that she and Ward were in a relationship. In a section of the request captioned History of Abuse, Rodgers declared that Ward has shaken [her] and pushed [her] around, and that he threatened to use one of the two guns he owns to kill her and will bury [her] in the desert. In a section captioned Recent Abuse, Rodgers declared that on May 20, 2007, Ward punched her in the stomach; on June 3, at the church they both attended, Ward made a threat against her in front of others; and Ward also called her on the phone and left messages that he would kill Rodgers and himself.



The matter was tried to the court on June 28, 2007. Rodgerss declaration was received in evidence. Testifying before the court, Rodgers stated that she had attended a church for the past 30 years, of which Ward had been the pastor for 10 years. She and Ward had been in a relationship for eight years. Their sexual relationship included consensual spanking. Ward had disclaimed the relationship in public. On May 20, 2007, Ward beat Rodgers, resulting in bruising. (Rodgerss neighbor testified that Rodgers showed the bruising to the neighbor on that day.) Rodgers saw Ward on two separate occasions on May 20. On the second occasion they had consensual sex in his office.



Rodgerss testimony continued that on May 24, 2007, she went to Wards house to take a pregnancy test in his presence. Upon hearing that Rodgers was pregnant, Ward said he would brand Rodgerss butt with a hanger. He was going to stick a hanger in the fire in the shape of an O. O is supposed to be significant of submissive women. Ward was sitting in a chair in the kitchen in front of a stove. He took the hanger apart and put the end part of the hanger into an O, stuck it in the fire, and put me over his lap. I started fighting him. I said, Let me go, let me go. I didnt come here for this. He did let me up.



Rodgers further testified that on May 25 Ward called her eight to ten times, stating that he would kill her and kill himself. In church the next Sunday, Ward told the congregation that Rodgers was claiming to be pregnant but he was not in love with her and did not intend to marry her. On Memorial Day weekend, Rodgers reported the abuse to a deacon at the church who is a police officer. She spoke to the deacon [p]retty much for having [Ward] removed as the pastor of the church.



For his part, Wards testimony included details of what he characterized as his and Rogers very aggressive sex life, including tying each other up and using a rough hand. He was not aware of ever having inflicted bruises on Rodgers. As to Rodgerss pregnancy, Ward told the congregation that he would live up to [his] responsibility as far as the child is concerned if paternity is proved. He did not remember Rodgers coming to his house on May 24, 2007, and denied that Rodgers had performed a pregnancy test in his house. Ward admitted he had been convicted of felony child abuse, explaining that he had spanked his son and was granted probation with the understanding that the case would be dismissed upon completion of a 52-week parenting class. At the time of trial he was serving his probationary period.



DISCUSSION



A person may seek a civil injunction if he or she has suffered harassment, which includes unlawful violence, a credible threat of violence, or a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses the person . . . . (Code Civ. Proc., 527.6, subd. (b).) Credible threat of violence is a knowing and willful statement or course of conduct that would place a reasonable person in fear for his or her safety . . . . (Id., 527.6, subd. (b)(2).) Course of conduct is a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose . . . . (Id., 527.6, subd. (b)(3).) The standard of proof for a civil injunction is clear and convincing evidence. (Id., 527.6, subd. (d).)



Ward contends that the standard of proof was not met here. He argues Rodgerss allegations of statements that he would kill her or himself did not constitute a credible threat because they were not corroborated by any witness or evidence. Moreover, Wards testimony, which was unrefuted, established that certain conduct and language was a part of the sexual foreplay. According to Ward, Rodgerss credibility was further undermined because the incident Rodgers alleged to have occurred on May 24 was not included in Rodgerss declaration regarding Recent Abuse. Ward also contends that the evidence was insufficient to show that Rodgers was seriously alarmed, annoyed, or harassed in that Rodgers voluntarily went to his office and engaged in sex with him on May 20, 2007.



[Wards] argument in this regard appears to be little more than a concerted effort to have this court reweigh the evidence presented, something we may not do. [Citation.] (FresnoCounty Dept. of Children & Family Services v. Superior Court (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 626, 646.) A reviewing court applies the substantial evidence standard of review to a trial courts factual findings, regardless of the burden of proof at trial. [Citations.] Our sole inquiry is whether, on the entire record, there is any substantial evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted, supporting the courts finding. [Citation.] We must accept as true all evidence . . . tending to establish the correctness of the trial courts findings . . . , resolving every conflict in favor of the judgment. [Citation.] (Sabbah v. Sabbah (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 818, 822823.)



Almost all of Rodgerss testimony conflicted with the testimony given by Ward. We have no basis upon which to question the trial courts assessment of that testimony, which included Rodgerss assertions and Wards denials of a beating that produced bruises on May 20 and the threat of branding on May 24. The courts conclusion that the testimony satisfied the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6 and its issuance of an injunction on that basis must therefore be upheld.



DISPOSITION



The judgment is affirmed.



NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.



MALLANO, Acting P. J.



We concur:



VOGEL, J.



ROTHSCHILD, J.



Publication courtesy of San Diego free legal advice.



Analysis and review provided by Santee Property line attorney.



San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com