Summary: Adjudication was proper were circumstantial evidence established that the child was in the mothers care at the time of the injuries and the injuries were consistent with abuse. Evidence that is immaterial to the facts of consequence is irrelevant and can be properly excluded.
A petition was filed on December 1, 1993 alleging that McCauley H. (born March 14, 1992) was a child who lived in a situation dangerous to life or limb or injurious to the health or morals of such juvenile by physical abuse. The abuse was brought to the attention of the police on November 25, 1993 when the boy’s parental grandmother saw bruising on his face, back, and rib area. On November 29, 1993 a pediatrician examined the boy and concluded that he had been intentionally injured on multiple occasions within the last 5 to 14 days. McCauley’s primary care physician also noted concern of possible child abuse in his notes from a recent well-baby visit. Since birth, McCauley had been in the care and custody of his mother, who shared a home with her boyfriend. Her boyfriend had an extensive criminal history and drug and alcohol problems. Neither the mother nor her boyfriend could explain the bruising. No new bruising occurred after he was removed from the care of his mother on November 25. A temporary order placed McCauley with the Department of Social Services on December 10, 1993 and an adjudication hearing was held on February 2 and 16, 1994. The court found by the preponderance of the evidence that the bruises sustained by McCauley were consistent with a child that had been physically abused, although inconclusive as to who inflicted the abuse. The court adjudicated McCauley as a child who was in a situation dangerous to life or limb or injurious to his health. Evidence was presented as to the possible causes of the bruises and the character and veracity of primary caretakers. Additionally, the mother attempted to present a letter from the county attorney to her former counsel suggesting that the state believed the mother was trying to protect her boyfriend. The state objected and the court sustained. The mother appealed the adjudication to the District Court. The District Court affirmed the adjudication.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed. The mother appealed the decision of the District Court to affirm the decision of the lower court. She first argued the evidence was insufficient to support the adjudication as it was circumstantial. The Court disagreed. Direct evidence demonstrated that the bruising on McCauley was consistent with abuse and not an accident and occurred while in the mother’s care. Additionally, circumstantial evidence can be sufficient if it support that the parent had control over the child during the period when the abuse or neglect occurred and multiple injuries or impairments of health have occurred which are consistent with abuse. Upon review of the record, the Court concludes that the evidence supported finding that McCauley was a child under § 43-347(3)(a). The mother also argued that she was prejudiced by the exclusion of the letter between her former counsel and the county attorney. The Court disagreed, finding the letter to be immaterial to the fact at issue and therefore irrelevant.