Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 41-5-106 (2026)

Order Of Adjudication -- Noncriminal

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 41. MINORS

CHAPTER 5. YOUTH COURT ACT

Part 1. General

Order Of Adjudication -- Noncriminal

41-5-106. Order of adjudication -- noncriminal. A placement of any youth in any correctional facility under this chapter may not be deemed commitment to a penal institution. An adjudication on the status of any youth in the jurisdiction of the court may not operate to impose any of the civil disability imposed on a person by reason of conviction of a criminal offense. An adjudication may not be deemed a criminal conviction, and a youth may not be charged with or convicted of any crime in any court except as provided in this chapter. Neither the disposition of a youth under this chapter nor evidence given in youth court proceedings under this chapter is admissible in evidence except as otherwise provided in this chapter.

History: En. 10-1235 by Sec. 35, Ch. 329, L. 1974; amd. Sec. 11, Ch. 571, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 10-1235; amd. Sec. 55, Ch. 609, L. 1987; amd. Sec. 6, Ch. 339, L. 2021.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 1982–2013 · leading case: Matter of K.E.G. Youth, 2013 MT 82 (Mont. 2013).
Matter of K.E.G. Youth, 2013 MT 82 (Mont. 2013). · cites it 28× “Opinion, ¶ 13; § 41-5-106, MCA. • Subsection (3) provides that a person who has been “convicted” of criminal mischief shall be fined not to exceed $1,500, imprisoned in the county jail for any term not to exceed six months, or both; but if the offender causes “pecuniary loss” in…”
United States v. Juv. Male, 2011 MT 104 (Mont. 2011). · cites it 12× “[N]o adjudication upon the status of any youth in the jurisdiction of the court shall operate to impose any of the civil disability imposed upon a person by reason of conviction of a criminal offense, nor shall such adjudication be deemed a criminal conviction, nor shall any…”
State v. Hastings, 2007 MT 294 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 6× “Section 41-5-1513(1)(c), MCA, provides, in part, that "the youth court may .”
State Ex Rel. Elliot v. Dist. Court, 684 P.2d 481 (Mont. 1984). · cites it 6× “The primary purposes of these statutory provisions are to make it clear that delinquency proceedings in Youth Court are noncriminal, section 41-5-106, MCA, and to prohibit prosecution of youths in district courts while they are youths, section 41-5-206(4), MCA.”
State v. Villanueva, 2005 MT 192 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 3× “Section 41-5-106, MCA, of the Montana Youth Court Act, provides, in relevant part, that “no adjudication upon the status of any youth in the jurisdiction of the court shall.”
State v. Holzworth, 651 P.2d 1255 (Mont. 1982). · cites it 18× “In those jurisdictions having juvenile court statutes excluding evidence similar to section 41-5-106, MCA, some have allowed introduction of the evidence of the youth proceedings in certain circumstances.”
United States v. William Nielsen, 694 F.3d 1032 (9th Cir. 2012). “”); Mont. Code Ann. § 41-5-106 (“No adjudication upon the status of any youth in the jurisdiction of the court .”
In re B. L. T., 853 P.2d 1226 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 2× “In § 41-5-106, MCA, the legislature has emphasized that the placement to a youth correctional facility shall not be deemed commitment to a penal institution, and such an adjudication shall not be deemed a criminal conviction.”
In re of G.T.M., 2009 MT 443 (Mont. 2009). “Sections 41-5-106, -345(2), MCA; State ex rel.”
State v. Twoteeth, 711 P.2d 789 (Mont. 1985). · cites it 3× “Const, amend VI; 1972 Mont. Const., Art. II, Section 24.”
In re T.A.S., 797 P.2d 217 (Mont. 1990). · cites it 3× “Section 41-5-106, MCA. C.S. 210 Mont. at 146 , 687 P.”
In re J.D.N., 2008 MT 420 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 2× “See § 41-5-106, MCA. Rather, if the evidence supports the commission of the offense contained in the petition alleging the youth to be a delinquent youth, a youth court may adjudicate a youth as a delinquent youth.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.