T.K.

T.K. appeals the order sustaining the allegations in the juvenile dependency petition concerning his daughter J.K. under Welfare and Institutions Code 1 section 300, subdivisions (a), (b) and (d). T.K. claims the court erred in concluding that one incident of sexual abuse committed approximately six years before the petition was filed and one incident of physical abuse about two years before filing demonstrated the minor was at risk of future harm. As we shall explain, we do not agree. First, on appeal T.K. does not deny the sexual abuse in which he was alleged to have raped his daughter or the physical abuse in which he was alleged to have struck the minor and dislocated her shoulder constitute instances of prior “serious physical harm” under section 300. Contrary, to T.K.’s argument, pursuant to section 300 subdivisions (a), (b) and (d), the court can exercise dependency jurisdiction based on findings of prior instances of serious harm or abuse. In any event, *1429 the evidence in the record is sufficient to support a finding of future risk of harm. Accordingly, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

J.K. (Minor), bom in September 1992, is the daughter of T.K.…