RECORD IMPOUNDED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-1065-18T1
NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
F.P.,
Defendant,
and
J.B.,
Defendant-Appellant. _____________________________
IN THE MATTER OF V.B., JU.B., and JUL.B.,
Minors. _____________________________
Submitted March 12, 2020 – Decided April 23, 2020
Before Judges Alvarez and DeAlmeida. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Middlesex County, Docket No. FN-12-0230-17.
Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Robyn A. Veasey, Deputy Public Defender, of counsel; Ingrid A. Enriquez, Designated Counsel, on the brief).
Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Melissa H. Raksa, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Salima E. Burke, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
Respondent minors have not filed a brief.
PER CURIAM
Defendant J.B.1 appeals from the April 2, 2018 order of the Family Part
finding he abused and neglected three of his children. We affirm.
I.
The following facts are derived from the record. J.B. and defendant F.P.
are the parents of three minor children, V.B., Ju.B., and Jul.B.
On April 11, 2017, J.B. was driving with F.P. and Jul.B. as passengers.
After dropping off the child, J.B. pulled a knife on F.P. and stabbed her
repeatedly. As he stabbed F.P., J.B. said "[d]ie . . . . [y]ou deserve it." Having
1 We identify the parties by initials to protect confidential information in the record. R. 1:38-3(d)(12). A-1065-18T1 2 wrested the knife from J.B. and finding the car door locked, F.P. jumped out of
the window of the moving car. J.B. drove away. Emergency personnel who
found F.P. on the side of the road airlifted her to a trauma center, where she was
treated for stab wounds to her shoulder and abdomen, and fractures of the neck,
ankle, and ribs.
After stabbing F.P., J.B. called F.P.'s adult daughter, S.P., and told her he
killed F.P. and planned to kill himself. He asked her to look after her younger
siblings. V.B., then sixteen, was with S.P. when her father called. She heard
his conversation with S.P. over the speakerphone.
Police subsequently arrested J.B. An officer reported the incident to
plaintiff Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP).
An investigation by DCPP revealed a history of abuse in the family.
DCPP's predecessor agency substantiated allegations of abuse or neglect by J.B.
in 2004, 2005, 2007, and 2011, and placed the children in resource care
temporarily in 2009 and 2011.
With respect to the stabbing, V.B. told an investigator she was not
surprised by J.B.'s attack on her mother because he was jealous and suspected
her mother of talking to another man. According to V.B., her father placed
recording devices throughout the home to record F.P.'s conversations. V.B.
A-1065-18T1 3 reported that J.B. had often threatened F.P., including threatening to shoot her
in her vagina. She had often heard her parents arguing but had not seen them
physically fight.
Ju.B. also told investigators J.B. often threatened F.P., and the stabbing
did not come as a surprise to her. She confirmed J.B. had placed recording
devices in the home. She witnessed F.P. push and slap J.B. to get him to leave
the home. She worried J.B. would harm her mother. Ju.B. learned J.B. stabbed
her mother through news reports she viewed on her cellphone and television, as
well as from V.B.
Jul.B. told an investigator J.B. and F.P. constantly argued, although he did
not understand what they were saying because they argued in Spanish, which he
did not understand. He stated he would hide in his bedroom when his parents
argued and had not seen physical violence between them.
During the investigation, J.B. claimed after he confronted F.P. with a
recording of her conversation with another man, she pulled a large kitchen knife
on him. According to J.B., F.P. was injured during a tussle for control of the
knife. He claimed after he gained control of the knife, F.P. jumped out of the
moving car. He did not recall calling S.P. or saying that he had killed F.P.
A-1065-18T1 4 DCPP thereafter filed a complaint for custody, care, and supervision of
the children, which the court granted. The children were placed with relatives.
The trial court held a three-day factfinding hearing on allegations of J.B.'s
abuse and neglect of the three children. In addition to hearing testimony from
fact witnesses, including two of the children, the court heard testimony from an
expert in domestic violence, child abuse, and psychology called by DCPP. J.B.
did not call an expert witness.
The expert testified regarding his psychological evaluations of each child
and F.P. He opined V.B. suffered trauma stemming from the stabbing of her
mother, which "piled upon years and years of prior traumas of a similar nature."
In the expert's opinion, V.B.'s trauma rose to the level of emotional abuse. The
expert added that, if nothing were done, V.B. could develop a conduct disorder
causing her to have dysfunctional relationships as a result of the trauma she
experienced.
The expert opined Ju.B. suffered trauma associated with both past and
recent domestic violence in the family, resulting in emotional abuse. He further
opined Jul.B. suffered trauma from exposure to domestic abuse that could have
significance later in life, particularly from having been in the car shortly before
J.B. stabbed his mother.
A-1065-18T1 5 On April 2, 2018, the trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of
law in an oral decision. The court concluded J.B. failed to exercise a minimum
degree of care by exposing each of the children to ongoing domestic violence.
As the court explained, J.B.,
although aware of the dangers inherent in the situation, namely, the abusive relationship he continued with [F.P.], . . . through his own actions . . . caused harm and created a risk of harm to the children by his . . . continued actions with his wife. Those actions caused the children to suffer trauma . . . .
The court also found J.B.
clearly acted with a reckless disregard for the safety of his children in conducting this in front of his children for such a period of time, culminating . . . in this incident of the stabbing and then making that statement which [V.B.] heard.
Finally, the court adopted the expert's testimony that each child
was suffering from a harm from trauma that was caused by this exposure to domestic violence and that each of them needed individual therapy to deal with the issues that they have dealt with because of this ongoing domestic violence that they have seen in the home.
The court concluded that even in the absence of the children witnessing physical
violence, the record contained credible evidence of a causal relationship
between their exposure to their parents' violent relationship and their current
emotional conditions. Thus, the court found by a preponderance of the evidence
A-1065-18T1 6 J.B.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
RECORD IMPOUNDED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-1065-18T1
NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
F.P.,
Defendant,
and
J.B.,
Defendant-Appellant. _____________________________
IN THE MATTER OF V.B., JU.B., and JUL.B.,
Minors. _____________________________
Submitted March 12, 2020 – Decided April 23, 2020
Before Judges Alvarez and DeAlmeida. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Middlesex County, Docket No. FN-12-0230-17.
Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Robyn A. Veasey, Deputy Public Defender, of counsel; Ingrid A. Enriquez, Designated Counsel, on the brief).
Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Melissa H. Raksa, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Salima E. Burke, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
Respondent minors have not filed a brief.
PER CURIAM
Defendant J.B.1 appeals from the April 2, 2018 order of the Family Part
finding he abused and neglected three of his children. We affirm.
I.
The following facts are derived from the record. J.B. and defendant F.P.
are the parents of three minor children, V.B., Ju.B., and Jul.B.
On April 11, 2017, J.B. was driving with F.P. and Jul.B. as passengers.
After dropping off the child, J.B. pulled a knife on F.P. and stabbed her
repeatedly. As he stabbed F.P., J.B. said "[d]ie . . . . [y]ou deserve it." Having
1 We identify the parties by initials to protect confidential information in the record. R. 1:38-3(d)(12). A-1065-18T1 2 wrested the knife from J.B. and finding the car door locked, F.P. jumped out of
the window of the moving car. J.B. drove away. Emergency personnel who
found F.P. on the side of the road airlifted her to a trauma center, where she was
treated for stab wounds to her shoulder and abdomen, and fractures of the neck,
ankle, and ribs.
After stabbing F.P., J.B. called F.P.'s adult daughter, S.P., and told her he
killed F.P. and planned to kill himself. He asked her to look after her younger
siblings. V.B., then sixteen, was with S.P. when her father called. She heard
his conversation with S.P. over the speakerphone.
Police subsequently arrested J.B. An officer reported the incident to
plaintiff Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP).
An investigation by DCPP revealed a history of abuse in the family.
DCPP's predecessor agency substantiated allegations of abuse or neglect by J.B.
in 2004, 2005, 2007, and 2011, and placed the children in resource care
temporarily in 2009 and 2011.
With respect to the stabbing, V.B. told an investigator she was not
surprised by J.B.'s attack on her mother because he was jealous and suspected
her mother of talking to another man. According to V.B., her father placed
recording devices throughout the home to record F.P.'s conversations. V.B.
A-1065-18T1 3 reported that J.B. had often threatened F.P., including threatening to shoot her
in her vagina. She had often heard her parents arguing but had not seen them
physically fight.
Ju.B. also told investigators J.B. often threatened F.P., and the stabbing
did not come as a surprise to her. She confirmed J.B. had placed recording
devices in the home. She witnessed F.P. push and slap J.B. to get him to leave
the home. She worried J.B. would harm her mother. Ju.B. learned J.B. stabbed
her mother through news reports she viewed on her cellphone and television, as
well as from V.B.
Jul.B. told an investigator J.B. and F.P. constantly argued, although he did
not understand what they were saying because they argued in Spanish, which he
did not understand. He stated he would hide in his bedroom when his parents
argued and had not seen physical violence between them.
During the investigation, J.B. claimed after he confronted F.P. with a
recording of her conversation with another man, she pulled a large kitchen knife
on him. According to J.B., F.P. was injured during a tussle for control of the
knife. He claimed after he gained control of the knife, F.P. jumped out of the
moving car. He did not recall calling S.P. or saying that he had killed F.P.
A-1065-18T1 4 DCPP thereafter filed a complaint for custody, care, and supervision of
the children, which the court granted. The children were placed with relatives.
The trial court held a three-day factfinding hearing on allegations of J.B.'s
abuse and neglect of the three children. In addition to hearing testimony from
fact witnesses, including two of the children, the court heard testimony from an
expert in domestic violence, child abuse, and psychology called by DCPP. J.B.
did not call an expert witness.
The expert testified regarding his psychological evaluations of each child
and F.P. He opined V.B. suffered trauma stemming from the stabbing of her
mother, which "piled upon years and years of prior traumas of a similar nature."
In the expert's opinion, V.B.'s trauma rose to the level of emotional abuse. The
expert added that, if nothing were done, V.B. could develop a conduct disorder
causing her to have dysfunctional relationships as a result of the trauma she
experienced.
The expert opined Ju.B. suffered trauma associated with both past and
recent domestic violence in the family, resulting in emotional abuse. He further
opined Jul.B. suffered trauma from exposure to domestic abuse that could have
significance later in life, particularly from having been in the car shortly before
J.B. stabbed his mother.
A-1065-18T1 5 On April 2, 2018, the trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of
law in an oral decision. The court concluded J.B. failed to exercise a minimum
degree of care by exposing each of the children to ongoing domestic violence.
As the court explained, J.B.,
although aware of the dangers inherent in the situation, namely, the abusive relationship he continued with [F.P.], . . . through his own actions . . . caused harm and created a risk of harm to the children by his . . . continued actions with his wife. Those actions caused the children to suffer trauma . . . .
The court also found J.B.
clearly acted with a reckless disregard for the safety of his children in conducting this in front of his children for such a period of time, culminating . . . in this incident of the stabbing and then making that statement which [V.B.] heard.
Finally, the court adopted the expert's testimony that each child
was suffering from a harm from trauma that was caused by this exposure to domestic violence and that each of them needed individual therapy to deal with the issues that they have dealt with because of this ongoing domestic violence that they have seen in the home.
The court concluded that even in the absence of the children witnessing physical
violence, the record contained credible evidence of a causal relationship
between their exposure to their parents' violent relationship and their current
emotional conditions. Thus, the court found by a preponderance of the evidence
A-1065-18T1 6 J.B. abused and neglected his children within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 9:6-
8.21(c)(4)(b).
On April 2, 2018, the court entered a written order memorializing its
conclusion.2
This appeal followed. J.B. makes the following argument for our
consideration:
THE TRIAL COURT’S LEGAL CONCLUSION THAT J.B. ABUSED OR NEGLECTED HIS CHILDREN WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ADEQUATE, SUBSTANTIAL, CREDIBLE EVIDENCE AND MUST BE REVERSED.
A. THE COURT'S RELIANCE ON [THE EXPERT'S] PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORT WAS ERRONEOUS WHERE THE FACTS CONTRADICTED HIS FINDINGS THAT THE CHILDREN WERE ABUSED OR NEGLECTED.
B. THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT THE ALLEGED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BETWEEN J.B. AND F.P. CAUSED HARM TO THE CHILDREN.
II.
We defer to Family Part judges' fact-finding because of their "special
jurisdiction and expertise in family matters," Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394,
2 The trial court subsequently terminated the litigation, with the parents retaining legal custody and F.P. retaining physical custody of the child ren. A-1065-18T1 7 413 (1998), their "opportunity to make first-hand credibility judgments about
the witnesses who appear on the stand[,] [and their] feel of the case that can
never be realized by a review of the cold record." N.J. Div. of Youth & Family
Servs. v. M.C. III, 201 N.J. 328, 342-43 (2010) (quoting N.J. Div. of Youth &
Family Servs. v. E.P., 196 N.J. 88, 101 (2006)). Fact-finding that is supported
by "substantial credible evidence in the record" is upheld. N.J. Div. of Youth &
Family Servs. v. L.L., 201 N.J. 210, 226 (2010). However, we will not hesitate
to set aside a ruling that is "so wide of the mark that a mistake must have been
made." N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. M.M., 189 N.J. 261, 279 (2007)
(quoting C.B. Snyder Realty, Inc. v. BMW of No. Amer., Inc., 233 N.J. Super.
65, 69 (App. Div. 1989)).
After reviewing the record in light of J.B.'s arguments and the applicable
legal precedents, we find there is substantial credible evidence supporting the
trial court's conclusion J.B. abused and neglected the children. We add the
following comments.
The "main focus" of Title Nine, of which N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c)(4)(b) is a
part, is "the protection of children." Div. of Child Prot. & Permanency v. E.D.-
O., 223 N.J. 166, 178 (2015) (quoting G.S. v. Dep't of Human Servs., 157 N.J.
A-1065-18T1 8 161, 177 (1999)). Under Title Nine, a child is "[a]bused or neglected" when
their
physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as the result of the failure of [a] parent . . . to exercise a minimum degree of care . . . in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship, by unreasonably inflicting or allowing to be inflicted harm, or substantial risk thereof, including the infliction of excessive corporal punishment; or by any other acts of a similarly serious nature requiring the aid of the court . . . .
[N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c)(4)(b).]
Minimum degree of care "refers to conduct that is grossly or wantonly negligent,
but not necessarily intentional." G.S., 157 N.J. at 178. More is required than
ordinary negligence, but less is needed than an intentional infliction of injury.
Ibid. "[A] guardian fails to exercise a minimum degree of care when he or she
is aware of the dangers inherent in a situation and fails adequately to supervise
the child or recklessly creates a risk of serious injury to that child." Id. at 181.
Our Legislature has found that "children, even when they are not
themselves physically assaulted, suffer deep and lasting emotional effects from
exposure to domestic violence." N.J.S.A. 2C:25-18. A child's observation of
domestic violence, with no indication of harm resulting from that domestic
violence, cannot support an abuse and neglect finding. N.J. Div. of Youth &
A-1065-18T1 9 Family Servs. v. S.S., 372 N.J. Super. 13, 22-23, 28 (App. Div. 2004) ("we find
. . . that harm [from domestic violence] cannot be presumed in the absence of
evidence of its existence or potential"). However, abuse and neglect can be
established if there is credible evidence establishing "a causal relationship
between witnessing domestic violence and emotional distress in the [child]
. . . ." Id. at 22-23. For instance, we found abuse and neglect existed when the
children's exposure to domestic violence was linked by credible evidence to the
children's aggressive behaviors and speech delays. N.J. Div. of Youth & Family
Servs. v. I.H.C., 415 N.J. Super. 551, 584-86 (App. Div. 2010). Ultimately, "the
fact-sensitive nature of abuse and neglect cases . . . turns on particularized
evidence." N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. A.L., 213 N.J. 1, 28 (2013).
Essentially, J.B. argues his children were not harmed because they did not
directly witness any physical violence between their parents and were not
themselves physically assaulted. We disagree. The record includes expert
testimony linking J.B.'s domestic violence toward F.P. to his children's
psychological trauma, need for therapy, and potential long-term harm. They
were aware of J.B.'s violent acts towards F.P., including his violent assault on
her in the car. V.B. overheard J.B.'s admission to "killing" her mother shortly
after the stabbing. Ju.B. became aware of the attack from news reports naming
A-1065-18T1 10 her parents. Jul.B. frequently hid in his room to escape his parents' fights. The
stabbing was the culmination of a long pattern of domestic violence in the home.
The trial court judge, having had the opportunity to evaluate the expert's
testimony, found credible his opinion that the children's exposure to J.B.'s
violent acts caused them emotional harm. J.B. offered no contrary expert
testimony.
We disagree with J.B.'s argument the expert's opinion was rendered
incredible by the children's testimony. Although V.B. testified she was never
afraid J.B. would physically hurt her, the trial court's conclusion is based on the
emotional trauma V.B. suffered by exposure to J.B.'s violence against her
mother. As the expert explained, a child need not fear personal physical harm
to suffer potentially long-lasting emotional damage. The same is true for the
testimony of the other children, who denied having been physically assaulted by
J.B. and did not express fear of being assaulted. The trial court found credible
the expert's testimony that children exposed to a pattern of parental domestic
violence often minimize their experience in an effort to keep the family from
being separated.
Affirmed.
A-1065-18T1 11