## Facts

- Jon Henry Litdell was adjudged delinquent by a youth court and placed on probation, with permission to remain in his mother’s custody.
- The youth court selected a disposition involving the least restraint and minimal oversight, hoping probation would be adequate.
- While on probation, Litdell was taken into custody in connection with multiple incidents, including two assaults and batteries, shoplifting, car prowling, and causing a public disturbance.
- The state filed a petition seeking revocation of probation, alleging Litdell had engaged in conduct that would amount to felony-level wrongdoing if committed by an adult.
- The youth court revoked Litdell’s probation.
- Litdell appealed, arguing the youth court lacked authority to revoke or change the terms of his probation because he had not violated an express probation condition and had not been convicted of a crime.
- The state responded that probation imposed by a youth court carries an implied condition of good behavior.

## Issues

1. Whether a youth court may revoke a juvenile’s probation based on proven misconduct when the juvenile did not violate an express written probation condition and has not been criminally convicted of the new acts.

## Decision

- The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the youth court’s revocation of Litdell’s probation.
- The court accepted the state’s position that juvenile probation carries an implied condition of good behavior.
- The court held that a youth court may revoke probation upon a factual showing that the juvenile engaged in serious misconduct while on probation, even without a separate criminal conviction and even without pointing to a specific written probation term that precisely described the new wrongdoing.

## Legal Principles

- Juvenile probation includes an implied requirement that the child refrain from further delinquent or criminal-type conduct and behave appropriately while under the court’s supervision.
- A youth court may revise a juvenile’s disposition—including revoking probation—when the evidence shows probation has not worked and continued supervision in the community is no longer suitable.
- Revocation in the youth-court setting is a dispositional determination based on the court’s findings about the juvenile’s conduct and needs; it is not conditioned on obtaining a criminal conviction for the same conduct.
- The absence of an express probation condition aimed at the specific misconduct does not bar revocation when the conduct violates the basic expectation of good behavior while on probation.

## Conclusion

In re Litdell holds that when a youth court places a juvenile on probation, the probation carries an implied good-behavior requirement. If the juvenile commits additional misconduct while on probation, the youth court may revoke probation and change the disposition based on its factual findings, even if no express probation term was violated and even if the juvenile has not been convicted of a crime for the new acts.


In re Litdell, 232 So. 2d 733 (1970)