In Re KD

21 Cal.Rptr.3d 711 (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1013 In re K.D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

Tanya H., Defendant and Appellant.

No. D044381. Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division One.

November 10, 2004. Sharon S. Rollo, under appointment by the Court if Appeal, Chatsworth, for Defendant and Appellant.

John J. Sansone, County Counsel, Susan Strom, Chief Deputy County Counsel, and Patrice Plattner-Grainger, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Rich Pfeiffer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, Orange, for the Minor.

O'ROURKE, J.

Tanya H. (the mother) appeals juvenile court orders establishing a permanent [712] plan of guardianship for her son, K.D., naming a guardian and terminating the court's dependency jurisdiction. She argues the court abused its discretion in not selecting a guardian whose residence is in California or, in the alternative, not maintaining jurisdiction in order to oversee visitation. We affirm the orders establishing the guardianship and naming K.D.'s foster father as his guardian. We reverse the order terminating dependency jurisdiction.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On August 29, 2002, the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (the Agency) petitioned on behalf of four-month-old K.D. under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b),[1] alleging he had a medical disorder requiring care and treatment that the mother was unable to provide because of her methamphetamine use. The mother admitted she was addicted to methamphetamine. She appeared to have difficulty answering the social worker's questions. She had been a client of the Regional Center in the past and had attended special education classes in school.

The court detained K.D. and appointed counsel. At the jurisdictional/dispositional hearing on September 18, 2002, the mother submitted to the allegations. The court sustained the petition, declared K.D. a dependent child and placed him with his maternal grandmother. It ordered the mother to comply with her case plan and ordered supervised visits.