if Anyssa were returned to Mother’s care. In addition, Dr. Kathryn Coffman, a pediatrician who had examined Anyssa as well as Ashley’s medical reports, testified that she would be “very concerned about any child being in [Mother’s] care” based on Mother’s failure “to take any steps to protect” Ashley despite Mother’s knowledge that the abuse was taking place. As Dr. Coffman put it, “for two months at least [Ashley] was beaten while in [Mother’s] care, that she continued to leave the child in harm’s way, and the child ended up dying a very painful death” due to Mother’s knowing failure to protect her. Our review of the record reveals sufficient evidence to uphold the juvenile court’s best interest finding. See Kent K v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279, 288, ¶ 42, 110 P.3d 1013, 1022 (2005) (<HOLDING>). CONCLUSION ¶ 18 Based on the foregoing, we
holding that uncharged conduct may be considered at sentencing when that conduct is proven by a preponderance of the evidence holding in the context a rico conspiracy that the applicability of relevant conduct need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence not beyond a reasonable doubt holding all exceptions to discharge under  523a must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence holding that best interest of child need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence holding that when information which potentially undermines the best interest of the child as well as the interest sought to be protected by the legitimation statutes and the policy of this state it must first be tested in light of the best interest of the child standard