What is one potential outcome of successfully using an objection in youth court?

Successfully using an objection in youth court can lead to the exclusion of inadmissible evidence from consideration, which is essential for ensuring that the trial proceeds fairly and justly. When an attorney raises a valid objection, they are essentially arguing that certain evidence should not be allowed based on legal grounds, such as relevance, hearsay, or other evidentiary rules. If the judge agrees with the objection, that evidence is excluded, preventing it from influencing the jury's or the judge's decision. This outcome not only upholds the integrity of the court process but also protects the rights of the youth involved by ensuring that decisions are made based on legally permissible evidence.

The other options do not accurately represent typical outcomes associated with objections in court. For instance, prolonging the trial duration is generally not a goal of making an objection; rather, objections aim to streamline proceedings by maintaining focus on admissible evidence. Dismissing the entire case is a much more significant action that typically requires specific legal grounds beyond an objection; it's not a standard outcome from making an objection. Changing the judge's ruling can happen, but it’s not a direct or guaranteed result of an objection; rather, it would depend on the context of the objection and the arguments presented.