La. Ch. Code art. 887
This is the official text of La. Ch. Code art. 887, part of Louisiana’s Children's Code — governs child custody, child protection, and juvenile justice in Louisiana.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
Vacation of adjudication; grounds
Official statutory text
A. On motion of the child prior to disposition, a delinquency adjudication shall be vacated and the child discharged if, after contradictory hearing, the court finds that:
(1) The petition is substantially defective, in that an essential averment is omitted, although the child may be recharged by a new petition within the time limitations provided by law for that offense.
(2) The delinquent act charged in the petition is not based upon an offense which is punishable under a valid statute.
(3) The court making the adjudication lacked jurisdiction.
(4) The act charged constitutes double jeopardy, if not previously urged.
(5) The prosecution was not timely instituted, if not previously urged.
B. On motion of the child before disposition, an adjudication shall be vacated and a new adjudication hearing ordered if, after a contradictory hearing, the court finds that:
(1) The adjudication is not responsive to the petition, or is otherwise so defective that it will not form the basis of a valid judgment, in which case the child shall be remanded to custody or bail to await a new adjudication hearing.
(2) The adjudication was obtained by fraud or mistake sufficient to justify vacating the adjudication.
(3) The child and his counsel satisfy the requirements of Articles 851(3), 853, and 854 of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the discovery of new and material evidence.
(4) The adjudication judgment is contrary to the law and evidence.
C. If the court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served, it may vacate the adjudication prior to disposition, although the child may not be entitled to such relief as a matter of strict legal right.
Acts 1991, No. 235, ยง8, eff. Jan. 1, 1992.
(1) The petition is substantially defective, in that an essential averment is omitted, although the child may be recharged by a new petition within the time limitations provided by law for that offense.
(2) The delinquent act charged in the petition is not based upon an offense which is punishable under a valid statute.
(3) The court making the adjudication lacked jurisdiction.
(4) The act charged constitutes double jeopardy, if not previously urged.
(5) The prosecution was not timely instituted, if not previously urged.
B. On motion of the child before disposition, an adjudication shall be vacated and a new adjudication hearing ordered if, after a contradictory hearing, the court finds that:
(1) The adjudication is not responsive to the petition, or is otherwise so defective that it will not form the basis of a valid judgment, in which case the child shall be remanded to custody or bail to await a new adjudication hearing.
(2) The adjudication was obtained by fraud or mistake sufficient to justify vacating the adjudication.
(3) The child and his counsel satisfy the requirements of Articles 851(3), 853, and 854 of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the discovery of new and material evidence.
(4) The adjudication judgment is contrary to the law and evidence.
C. If the court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served, it may vacate the adjudication prior to disposition, although the child may not be entitled to such relief as a matter of strict legal right.
Acts 1991, No. 235, ยง8, eff. Jan. 1, 1992.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Dealing with a child custody matter in Louisiana?
See all Louisiana Child Custody lawyers
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.