This case, decided in 1979, has to do with the rights of juvenile criminal defendants. Specifically, it is about Miranda rights and juvenile suspects. In this case, the Court ruled that a juvenile accused had effectively waived his Miranda rights by asking for his probation officer.
In this case, the juvenile, when arrested, asked to see his probation officer before he would answer police questions. The police told him he could not. He then consented to answer questions without his probation officer present. The Supreme Court ruled that the juvenile was aware enough of his rights and that his asking for the probation officer was essentially the same as asking for a lawyer. Therefore, he had voluntarily chosen to answer the questions and the answers to those questions could be admitted in court.