New Preliminary Roadside Analysis – Drunk Driving Law Update

Effective January 12, 2015, the State of Michigan will have a new law controlling drunk driving cases. Governer Synder signed the bill October 14, 2015. The new law amends the pre-existing drunk driving statute, changing the way arrests can and will be performed here in Michigan. The new law creates a new term known as “preliminary roadside analysis.”

It seems, after reading the newly enacted statute, that this preliminary roadside analysis will replaced field sobriety tests and roadside preliminary breathe tests. The new law allows the officer to choose which investigative techinque to pursue within a drunk driving case by use of the preliminary roadside analysis. Furthermore, and an additional change to the pre-existing law, the refusal of a preliminary roadside analysis is not unlawful and an individual can be additionally charged for the refusal.

Pre-existing law only allows an officer to require a person only to submit to a preliminary roadside breathe test if the officer had reasonable cause to believe that the person was operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated or impaired. However, the new law expands the requirement new “preliminary roadside analysis” term and essentially replacing the term “preliminary chemical breath test”.

The new law and term (preliminary roadside analysis) applies to all forms of drunk driving cases and is used for investigating whether the individual is operating the motor vehicle under:

(a) Alcoholic liquor.

(b) A controlled substance, as that term is defined in section 7104 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.7104.

(c) Any other intoxicating substance, as that term is defined in section 625.

(d) Any combination of the substances listed in subdivisions (a) to (c).

It is apparent that the new law signficantly changes the course of events and circumstances that will now occur within drunk driving case. Under pre-existing, field sobriety tests were used in part to obtains facts to support a “reasonable cause” determination, which is then used to allow the police to search to request a preliminary breath test. Technically speaking, this new term and law takes away the need to first obtain reasonable cause before providing a roadside preliminary breathe test.

Furthermore under pre-existing law, an officer must advise the driver that failure to take a preliminary breath test is a violation of Michigan law, so the driver can then make a choice to take such a test or risk the punishment for refusal. However, this leads to questions that must be answered at some point in time, such as  “must the officer advise of such pentaly under the new law?” or “if the driver refuses to submit to preliminary roadside analysis will this be admissible before a jury?”

Ultimately, these questions and many more will not be answered until the new law becomes effective and the first drunk driver is arrested under the new law. It will be interesting to see how these matters will be handled by officers and the court system. Various issues will arise, which means that a criminal defense attorney will become even more necessary. Remember, know the law, maintain your rights, and lawyer-up. Josh Jones has your back 7-days a week and is only a phone call away. Call today for your free consultation.

Stop And Frisk Searches By Police Officers – United States v Noble Explained

On August 8, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals in the 6th Circuit, in United States v Noble, explained the limits and constraints place on an officer when he chooses to perform a Terry Stop and frisk searches on individuals. The Court explained that only in situations where the officer performing stop and frisk searches are able to reasonable articule suspicion of the individual concealing or carrying a dangerous weapon can the officer legally and consitutionally perform a Terry Stop and frisk on an individual.

The facts involved in the Noble case presented a scenario where local police were requested, by the DEA, to perform a traffic stop on a particular vehicle. The defendant was sitting in the passenger seat at the time of the traffic stop, and after the driver consented to the search of the vehicle both driver and defendant-passenger exited the vehicle. Prior to the search, one of the officers noticed the defendant seemed nervous and upon exiting the vehicle determined it was proper to perform a frisk of the defendant in order to ensure the officer’s safety. During the frisk search the officer located several baggies of narcotics, narcotic paraphernalia, and a hand-gun.  The defendant was subsequently arrested and eventually came-forth the matter to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Court in Noble explained that Police Officer must remember that there is no general safety rule or exception to the warrant requirement, even when stop and frisk searches are performed. An Officer may rely on his or her own personal experience and training when determining whether there is reasonably articulable suspicion that an individual may be concealing or carrying a dangerous weapon. Even more, the assumption that individual’s involved in drug-trafficing or smuggling are or could be possessing a dangerous weapon is very real; however, in order to perform legal stop and frisk searches of an individual in such a situation, as the one involved in this case, some corroboration must be made linking the individual to be frisk searched to the activity of drug-dealing or trafficing.

Therefore, the Court in Noble went on to conclude and explain that the individual defendant in that particular case was searched illegally. There were no facts indicating that the defendant was involved in drug-dealing, and whats more even the driver was not positively identified as the individual the DEA had been watching. This case reiterates long-standing case precedent involving Terry Stop and Frisk searches. It is so essnetial to know the law, maintain your rights, and lawyer-up whenever you are facing a criminal charge (misdemeanor or felony).

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

PROSTITUTION SOLICITING AND ACCOSTING FOR IMMORAL PURPOSES

Selling yourself or your body for sex has been a long standing crime in the State of Michigan and most of the United States. The term, as you may know, for selling ones self for sex is prostitution soliciting and accosting. It is also known as prostitution soliciting or accosting for an immoral act. See MCL 750.448. In order to be convicted the act, gesture, statement, or any other means to commit prostitution while in a public place, public building, or in a vehicle.

The statute means that an exchange for money does not need to occur in order to be convicted of the crime. Moreover, sex also does not actually have to occur. This means that an individual can be charged and arrested for prostitution by simply making a gesture that suggests he or she is enticing another to engage in his or her serves of sexual gratification.

In some instances a prostitution soliciting and accosting charge will be pled down to a disorderly conduct (common prostitute) charge. This is not always guaranteed; however, they can be common in cases where the individual charged has no record and other positive attributes in his or her life. On the other hand, some counties in Michigan make it a policy decision not to deal with individuals charged with prostitution soliciting and accosting for immoral purposes.

As an individual racks up more prostitution soliciting and accosting charges on his or her criminal record the possible punishment for the crime increases. It begins as a 93-day misdemeanor, attaching a $500.00 fine or both, and the maximum for an individual with 2 or more prior convictions under MCL 750.448 is a 2-year felony punishable by a $2,000.00 fine or both. See MCL 750.451.

In the end, it is best to contact and hire and attorney for this charge. It allows for the negotiations to be fair, straightforward, and judicial. Josh Jones has your back and is here for you 7-days a week at 734-355-0424 and 810-691-7308.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. LAWYER-UP.

What is Michigan Consecutive Sentencing?

Michigan Consecutive Sentencing involves the stacking of felony convictions and sentencing judgments on top of one another. For example, if Bill was sentenced on two counts of distribution to 5 months for each count to run consecutively then Bill would have to serve 10 months in jail.

Enforcement of Michigan Consecutive Sentencing

Michigan consecutive sentencing is mandatory for a felony firearm charge; when a prisoner escapes or attempts to escape from prison; when a prisoner escapes or attempts to escape from jail while serving a felony sentence or awaiting disposition on a felony charge; when a person on parole commits a new felony and is convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment; when a person who has been charged with a felony commits a major controlled substance offense while the first felony charge is pending; and when an inmate commits a crime during incarceration or as an escapee and the new crime is punishable by prison.

Michigan consecutive sentencing is possible when a person who has been charged with a felony commits another felony while the first felony charge is pending; when a term of imprisonment is imposed for any other offense arising from the same transaction as to first-degree home invasion; for carjacking or for any other sentence imposed for a conviction that arises out of the same transaction; for attempting to influence a juror; for bribing a witness; for using a computer to commit a crime; for committing a crime against a vulnerable adult; for committing identity theft; for having separate convictions under the Medicaid False Claims Act; and for taking a weapon from a police or corrections officer or for any term of imprisonment imposed for another violation arising from the same transaction.

It is important to understand all of the consequences when determining whether you want to accept a plea agreement or take the matter to trial. Michigan consecutive sentencing can and does occur from time-to-time. Make sure you have the right counsel handling your criminal matter.

Whenever you are faced with a criminal misdemeanor or felony you need counsel who always has your back. Contact Josh Joens 7-days a week. He maintains a full-service criminal defense law firm, specializing in Marihuana Defense.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

 

People v Green – Left To People v McQueen

The Michigan Supreme Court issued an Order in June 2013 reversing the Michigan Court of Appeals in People v Green, and explained that the trial court should follow the Court’s opinion as explained in People v McQueen. For those who do not know about People v Green, the matter involved a transfer from an MMMA patient to another MMMA patient. Therefore, the question or issue in People v Green was very similar to the question in People v McQueen.

Therefore, as explained in McQueen and ordered to be applied in People v Green, marihuana can only be transferred between caregiver and patient in order to qualify for Section 4 Immunity. The Court in McQueen also went as far to explain that a patient and a patient can transfer marihuana between one another but only when that transfer is for the benefit of medical use as applied to both patients. Wait what?

In essence, both patients involved in a transfer between one another must benefit from the medical use of marihuana while involved in the transfer. The Court in McQueen even went as far to explain that the transfer could be for the sale of marihuana; however, it went on to reiterate that the transfer must be for the benefit of medical use of marihuana as applied to both patients involved in the tranfer. Or the transfer involves the registerd caregiver and attached qualified patient.

This is an interesting topic to comprehend and identify, but there is a silver lining to all of what has occurred between the two cases. That silver lining is that the MMMA does allow for transfers under certain circumstances. It must also be noted that the issue discussed about, and involved in Green and McQueen, above deals with Section 4 – Immunity. If there is a finding that Immunity in a particular case is not substantiated by the facts of that particular case then the individual defendant may still have the opporunity to argue for a Section 8 – Affirmative Defense. It will be interesting to see the outcome of People v Green as it goes back to the trial court.

It is imperative to know the law, maintain your rights, and lawyer-up with a criminal defense attorney. Do not represent yourself, but instead obtain compentent and knowledgable counsel to assist you. Josh Jones specializes in Marihuana Defense and is here for you and your case. Call 734-355-0424 or 810-691-7308 today for your free consultation. He has your back!

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

Concealed Pistol Licenses & Michigan Pistol Free Zones

Michigan Pistol Free Zones should be known and you should always be aware of them when carrying your concealed weapon. Having a Concealed Pistol License (CPL) allows for an individual to carry a conceal weapon on his or her person while in public; however, there are certain areas that an individual, even with his or her license, are not allowed to carry (i.e. Michigan Pistol Free Zones).

Michigan Pistol Free Zones limit those areas pursuant to MCL 28.4250. Those that hold a CPL are not allowed to carry a pistol in the following areas or establishments:

  • School property, except a parent or legal guardian who is picking up or dropping off a child and the pistol is kept in the parent’s or legal guardian’s car.
  • Public or private child care center or day care center, child caring instution or child placing agency.
  • Establishments serving liquor, yet the primary source of income stems from the sale of liquor; however, owners and employees are exempt.
  • Dormitories or classrooms within a college or university; however, Michigan State University, University of Michigan, and Wayne State University all have special status in the Michigan Constitution and elect their Board of Regents. This means that the state preemption law does not apply to those universities, which allows for each of them to pass their ordinances to ban the carrying of firearms anywhere on their respective campuses.
  • An entertainment facility with a seating capacity of 2,500 or more individuals that the individual knows or should know has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more individuals or that has a sign above each public entrance stating in letters not less than 1-inch high a seating capacity of 2,500 or more individuals.
  • Sports arena or stadium.
  • Churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, or other places of worship, unless authorized by the presiding official.
  • Hospitals

These Michigan Pistol Free Zones do not apply to all individuals, and thus some individuals are “Exempt From” Michigan Pistol Free Zones and allowed to carry a pistol in those areas. See MCL 28.4250. A box will be checked on the individual’s CPL license.

For those who violate these limitations of their CPL and Michigan Pistol Free Zones will be subject to the following, per MCL 28.4250, sanctions:

  • First Offense – State civil infraction and have the CPL suspended for 6-months.
  • Second Offense – A misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000.00, and have their CPL revoked.
  • Third Offense – A 4-year felony and a fine of not more than $5,000.00 or both, and the CPL will be revoked.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. LAWYER-UP WITH JOSH JONES

Guilty Plea Consequences – What Are They?

If you plead guilty or no contest, you give up your right to claim that it was not your choice to plead and/or that there were any promises, threats, or inducements to plead other than what is stated on the record in open court. Meaning you are waiving your right to be found guitly by members of your peers within a trial.

For example, a common guilty plea consequence can involve a controlled substance offense, certain alcohol-related offenses or traffic-related offenses can bring about a suspension or revocation of your  Michigan driver’s license. Other guilty plea consequences can result in the loss or restriction of a professional license; of the ability to obtain/retain certain licenses, permits, or employment; of eligibility for public/military service and/or benefits; of eligibility for public funds, including welfare benefits and student loans/grants/tax credits; of eligibility for public housing; of the right to vote; and of eligibility for jury duty.

Furthermore, Federal and/or state law may prohibit you from possessing or purchasing ammunition or a firearm (including a rifle, pistol, or revolver) if you are convicted of a felony or if you are convicted of a crime of violence and you are a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim; you share a child in common with the victim; you are or were cohabiting with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian; or you are or were involved with the victim in another similar relationship. In the end, guitly plea consequences are numerous and sometimes not thought of, but remember they can have a long lasting impact.

There may always be collateral consequences, or guilty plea consequences, not included within the general advice of rights. You are encouraged to conduct an independent search or consultation relating to the possible guilty plea consequences noted above and other possible and additional consequences related to your case. Always discuss guilty plea consequences with your attorney and, if necessary, with the court before the entry or rejection of any plea.

Guilty Plea Consequences – Specific Criminal Topic & Pleas

Immigration Issues

If you are not a legal citizen of the United States or were born in another country, your plea of guilty or no contest can result in deportation or otherwise affect your ability to remain in the United States. Regardless of whether deportation is applicable in your case, a conviction may affect your ability to enter into another country, including Canada.

Assaultive Crimes

Under MCL 770.9a, a defendant convicted by plea, verdict, or judgment of an assaultive crime shall be detained and shall not be admitted to bail unless the trial court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to pose a danger to other persons. Under MCL 770.9b, a defendant convicted of sexual assault of a minor (under age 16) shall be detained and shall not be admitted to bail.

Firearms & Crimes

Under MCL 750.239, violations of MCL 750.222 et seq. require forfeiture of the firearm or weapon. Michigan law also includes several distinct forfeiture acts relating to specific types of offenses including, but not limited to, controlled substances, firearms, gambling, motor vehicles, public employees, and a generic forfeiture act, MCL 600.4701 et seq.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

Common Drug Crime Defenses: Some You Know And Some You May Not

There are times when controlled substances and/or drugs crimes are accepted within society these days. Those accepted moments comes when those around the individuals are okay with the use and/or partaking iof the drug question. Moreover, another common time where individuals are allowed to use a controlled substance is when he or she has a valid license or proper authorization to use said drug. These are the most common drug crime defenses within Michigan, especially now because of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (aka MMA). The MMMA is an ideal drug crime defense for those found with or using marihuana.

Of course, the individual’s conduct must be in compliance with the his or her license or prescription in order to avoid prosecution. For example, an individual could still be charged with driving under the influence if he or she is over the limit or maxed out on a painkiller or some other drug that he or she has a valid prescription for, yet drug crime defense could still be applicable depending upon the individual’s case.

In order to be convicted of a drug crime an individual must actually possess the substance in question, and thus another drug crime defense becomes apparent. Possessing something can consist of two variation of “possession.” This is known as actual and constructive possession. Constructive possession is the idea that the individual charged has the ability to possess or control the substance. The idea and legal term can even bring about a conviction for an individual who is not the true owner, but still has the ability to possess and does possess it. Remember, if the individual has authority to possess the substance he or she will simply have to prove that fact to avoid prosecution, unless the act is performed outside the limitations set by statute.

Other possible drug crime defenses are substantively and factually based. Meaning, for example, if the police officers involved in a suspected criminal investigation and searched an individual’s car in violation of his or her Constitutional rights then something can be done, i.e. a drug crime defense used. The fruit of that violation will bring about a poison for the prosecutor’s case-in-chief because of what will happen to his evidentiary support involving that particular case. This poison would bring about suppression of any and all evidence obtained after the point of the illegal search of the individual vehicle.

In the end, when controlled substance charges are involved in your case you need to make sure you hire an attorney who understands the importance of how this affects you and who knows those common drug crime defenses that could assist you and your criminal matter. Did you know that drug convictions can and will bring about drivers license sanctions? These types of crimes are when you need someone to lean on. Lean on Josh Jones, he is here for you and always has your back.

DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.

MICHIGAN DRIVERS LICENSE SANCTIONS

Suspensions:

Definition: The privilege to drive is suspended for some definitive period of time (generally one year or less), and they typically restored after suspension period without the necessity of a DAAD hearing. However, depending on the charge and the individual’s driving record and criminal history

Most Common Drivers License Sanctions by Offenses:

  • OWI First Offense; OWI High BAC
  • Possession of Controlled Substances, including marihuana
  • Point Accumulation
  • Routine/Temporary Medical Issues

Revocations:

Definition: The Privilege to drive is revoked and denied, and thus the license privilege is not restored unless or until DAAD restores the privilege. The license is restored usually after a significant waiting period and a hearing on the matter to determine if you will again be provided with the privilege to obtain a license. No privileges are allowed during a revocation, and courts have little—if any—ability to intervene to override a revocation.

Most Common Offenses Resulting in Revocation:

  • OWI Second or Subsequent Offense
  • OWI Injury/Death
  • Serious Medical Issues

Typical Waiting Periods for Michigan Drivers License Sanctions:

  • 1 Year for two OWI offenses within 7 years or OWI Injury/Death
  • 5 Years for three OWI offenses within 10 years (assuming there was a prior revocation)

Most Common Ways to Lose Michigan Drivers License:

  • OWI
  • OWI Causing Serious Bodily Injury/Death
  • OWI Repeat Offenses
  • OWI High BAC (“Super Drunk” allegations)
  • OWI Refusals (Implied Consent Violations)
  • OWI-PD (Operating While Intoxicated w/Presence of Drugs)

Miscellaneous Criminal Offenses with Michigan Drivers License Sanctions:

  • Possession of Controlled Substances
  • Automobile Theft/Joyriding
  • Reckless Driving
  • Point Accumulation
  • Medical Issues
  • Accidents Resulting in Fatalities
  • Probationary Drivers with Points
  • Flee/Elude Police
  • Felony Vehicle Advisory (MCL 257.319)

Whenever you are involved with a criminal charge here in the State of Michigan, contact Josh Jones. He is here for you. It is important an essential to understand the consequences of criminal convictions. As you see above not all of the charges are driving related, which makes it imperative to contact a criminal defense lawyer for any and all criminal matters.

PLEASE DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. WE HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON. 

Remember, Josh Jones handles matters in Metro-Detroit (Oakland, Wayne & Macomb Counties), Genesee County, Livingston County, Lapeer County, and Washtenaw County. Contact him today!

What is Michigan Larceny?

Michigan larceny can loosely be defined as the taking of something (property) from another. The State of Michigan makes this particular area of law somewhat complex because of the various acts and property that can be involved in a Michigan larceny. Furthermore, there are numerous variations of punishment based upon the circumstances of an individual’s case and the property involved.

First and foremost, “[a] person who commits [Michigan] larceny by stealing any of the following [pieces of] property of another person is guilty of a crime,” see MCL 750.356, which includes:

(a) Money, goods, or chattels.

(b) A bank note, bank bill, bond, promissory note, due bill, bill of exchange or other bill, draft, order, or certificate.

(c) A book of accounts for or concerning money or goods due, to become due, or to be delivered.

(d) A deed or writing containing a conveyance of land or other valuable contract in force.

(e) A receipt, release, or defeasance.

(f) A writ, process, or public record.

(g) Nonferrous metal.

Once the property falls within one of the above categories, an individual charged with Michigan larceny can face, if convicted, one of the following punishments, see MCL 750.356:

  1. [A] person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than $15,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property stolen, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine . . . [if t]he property stolen has a value of $20,000.00 or more.
  2. [A] person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $10,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property stolen, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine . . . [if t]he property stolen has a value of $1,000.00 or more but less than $20,000.00.
  3. [A] person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $2,000.00 or 3 times the value of the property stolen, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine . . . [if t]he property stolen has a value of $200.00 or more but less than $1,000.00.
  4. If the property stolen has a value of less than $200.00, the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 93 days or a fine of not more than $500.00 or 3 times the value of the property stolen, whichever is greater, or both imprisonment and a fine.

Moreover, if an individual is convicted of a second or subsequent Michigan larceny charge than he or she will face an even hasher punishment than noted above. This enhancement in jail and fines is common in Michigan, and does not include the crime of Michigan larceny. The more crimes you commit the higher the jail exposure. Whenever you are faced with a Michigan larceny charge or other criminal charge contact Josh Jones today. He maintains a full-service criminal defense firm for you, and he always has your back.

PLEASE DO NOT RELY ON THESE LEGAL OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS WHEN REPRESENTING YOURSELF IN COURT. THESE ARTICLES ARE NOT MEANT TO COMPENSATE OR EFFECUATE LEGAL REPRESENTATION. YOU SHOULD AND MUST CONTACT AN ATTORNEY AND DISCUSS WITH HIM OR HER THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY AND ALL IDEAS, STATEMENTS, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS OR OTHERWISE STATED ON THIS SITE. HOPE TO SPEAK WITH YOU SOON.