MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE
Act 300 of 1949
257.324 Prohibited conduct; void or canceled license.
Sec. 324.
(1) A person shall not do any of the following:
(a) Display, or cause or permit to be displayed, or have in possession an operator's or chauffeur's license knowing the operator's or chauffeur's license to be fictitious or to have been canceled, revoked, suspended, or altered.
(b) Lend to or knowingly permit use of, by one not entitled to its use, the operator's or chauffeur's license issued to the person lending or permitting the use of the operator's or chauffeur's license.
(c) Display or to represent as one's own any operator's or chauffeur's license not issued to the person displaying the operator's or chauffeur's license.
(d) Fail or refuse to surrender to the department upon demand, any operator's or chauffeur's license which has been suspended, canceled, or revoked as provided by law.
(e) Use a false or fictitious name or give a false or fictitious address in an application for an operator's or chauffeur's license, or any renewal or duplicate of an operator's or chauffeur's license, or knowingly make a false statement or knowingly conceal a material fact or otherwise commit a fraud in making an application.
(f) Alter or otherwise cause to be altered any operator's or chauffeur's license so as to knowingly make a false statement or knowingly conceal a material fact in order to misrepresent as one's own the operator's or chauffeur's license.
(g) Use or have in possession in committing a crime an operator's or chauffeur's license that has been altered or that is used to knowingly make a false statement or to knowingly conceal a material fact in order to misrepresent as one's own the operator's or chauffeur's license.
(h) Furnish to a peace officer false, forged, fictitious, or misleading verbal or written information identifying the person as another person, if the person is detained for a violation of this act or of a local ordinance substantially corresponding to a provision of this act.
(i) Commit fraud related to the testing for or issuance of a commercial driver license or permit.
(j) Fail to schedule a retest appointment within 30 days after receiving the secretary of state's retest notification.
(2) An operator's or chauffeur's license issued to a person under this chapter upon an application that is untrue, or that contains false statements as to any material matters, or that was obtained by fraud in the testing for or issuance of the license, is void from the date of issuance. The operator or chauffeur who was issued the license is considered unlicensed and the license issued shall be returned upon request or order of the department. A person whose commercial driver license application is voided or canceled under this subsection, including as required under 49 CFR part 383, shall not reapply for a commercial driver license except as follows:
(a) Not sooner than 60 days after an application is voided or canceled.
(b) If the person obtained the license by fraud in the testing for or issuance of the commercial driver license or commercial learner's permit, not sooner than 365 days after the permit or license is canceled.
(c) If the person failed to schedule a retesting for a new commercial learner's permit or commercial driver license within 30 days after receiving the notification by the secretary of state for retesting, until the driver meets the department's requirements for applying for a new commercial learner's permit or commercial driver license.
History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1959, Act 250, Imd. Eff. Aug. 21, 1959 ;-- Am. 1967, Act 17, Eff. Nov. 2, 1967 ;-- Am. 1985, Act 79, Eff. Oct. 1, 1985 ;-- Am. 2001, Act 159, Eff. Feb. 1, 2002 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 298, Imd. Eff. July 20, 2006 ;-- Am. 2015, Act 11, Eff. July 8, 2015
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
15
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1970–2023 · leading case:
People v. Vasquez, 631 N.W.2d 711 (Mich. 2001).
People v. Vasquez, 631 N.W.2d 711 (Mich. 2001).
· cites it 6× “" MCL 257.324(1), in contrast, provides in relevant part: A person shall not do any of the following: (h) Furnish to a peace officer false, forged, fictitious, or misleading verbal or written information identifying the person as another person, if the person is detained for a…”
People v. Butler, 892 N.W.2d 6 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “) I suggest that the Legislature omitted many misdemeanors from PRV consideration both because such convictions have little predictive value, and because by counting them, there is a risk that a sentence may become disproportionate.”
Joni Aggoubi Zaitona v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 9 F.3d 432 (6th Cir. 1993).
· cites it 2× “(1) A person shall not do any of the following: (e) Use a false or fictitious name or give a false or fictitious address in an application for an operator’s or chauffeur’s license, or any renewal or duplicate of an operator’s or chauffeur’s license, or knowingly make a false…”
People of Michigan v. Marcus McCann, 887 N.W.2d 440 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“He ultimately pleaded guilty of OUIL; operating with a forged license, MCL 257.324(1); and operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol level of .”
People v. Barry, 178 N.W.2d 129 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).
· cites it 2× “(MCLA § 257.324 [Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 9.2024]).”
People v. Jackson, 686 N.W.2d 810 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 3× “§ 257.324, a provision of the Michigan Vehicle Code prohibiting the giving of a false name to a police officer.”
People v. Jackson, 686 N.W.2d 810 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 3× “The prosecutor also charged defendant with violating MCL 257.324, a provision of the Michigan Vehicle Code prohibiting the giving of a false name to a police officer.”
Robert Lewis Beal v. Midwest Recovery & Adjustment Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 6× “-2- a citation for violating MCL 257.324(1)(h). Following his arrest, Beal was taken into custody by the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) and was charged with a litany of parole violations.”
People of Michigan v. David Alan Giles (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “He challenges the trial court’s consideration of a license violation under MCL 257.324, and a disorderly person conviction under MCL 750.”
Carswell v. Michigan Parole Bd. (E.D. Mich. 2021).
· cites it 2× “904 (1)(c); and possession of an altered driver’s license, Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.324 . At the time of his conviction, Petitioner’s recommended sentence was 93 days “county time .”
People of Michigan v. Steven Duane Dent (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“81d(1); and providing false identification, MCL 257.324(1)(a). The trial court sentenced defendant to 270 months to 40 years’ imprisonment for possession with intent to deliver, 16 to 24 months’ imprisonment for resisting and obstructing, and 90 days in jail for providing false…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.324(1) — 2 cases
People v. Vasquez, 631 N.W.2d 711 (Mich. 2001).
“" MCL 257.324(1), in contrast, provides in relevant part: A person shall not do any of the following: (h) Furnish to a peace officer false, forged, fictitious, or misleading verbal or written information identifying the person as another person, if the person is detained for a…”
People of Michigan v. Marcus McCann, 887 N.W.2d 440 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“He ultimately pleaded guilty of OUIL; operating with a forged license, MCL 257.324(1); and operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol level of .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.324(1)(a) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Steven Duane Dent (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“81d(1); and providing false identification, MCL 257.324(1)(a). The trial court sentenced defendant to 270 months to 40 years’ imprisonment for possession with intent to deliver, 16 to 24 months’ imprisonment for resisting and obstructing, and 90 days in jail for providing false…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.324(1)(h) — 6 cases
People v. Vasquez, 631 N.W.2d 711 (Mich. 2001).
“" MCL 257.324(1), in contrast, provides in relevant part: A person shall not do any of the following: (h) Furnish to a peace officer false, forged, fictitious, or misleading verbal or written information identifying the person as another person, if the person is detained for a…”
People v. Butler, 892 N.W.2d 6 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“) I suggest that the Legislature omitted many misdemeanors from PRV consideration both because such convictions have little predictive value, and because by counting them, there is a risk that a sentence may become disproportionate.”
People v. Jackson, 686 N.W.2d 810 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“§ 257.324, a provision of the Michigan Vehicle Code prohibiting the giving of a false name to a police officer.”
Robert Lewis Beal v. Midwest Recovery & Adjustment Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
“-2- a citation for violating MCL 257.324(1)(h). Following his arrest, Beal was taken into custody by the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) and was charged with a litany of parole violations.”
People v. Jackson, 686 N.W.2d 810 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“The prosecutor also charged defendant with violating MCL 257.324, a provision of the Michigan Vehicle Code prohibiting the giving of a false name to a police officer.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.324(l)(e) — 1 case
Joni Aggoubi Zaitona v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 9 F.3d 432 (6th Cir. 1993).
“(1) A person shall not do any of the following: (e) Use a false or fictitious name or give a false or fictitious address in an application for an operator’s or chauffeur’s license, or any renewal or duplicate of an operator’s or chauffeur’s license, or knowingly make a false…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.324(l)(h) — 2 cases
People v. Vasquez, 631 N.W.2d 711 (Mich. 2001).
“" MCL 257.324(1), in contrast, provides in relevant part: A person shall not do any of the following: (h) Furnish to a peace officer false, forged, fictitious, or misleading verbal or written information identifying the person as another person, if the person is detained for a…”
People v. Butler, 892 N.W.2d 6 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“) I suggest that the Legislature omitted many misdemeanors from PRV consideration both because such convictions have little predictive value, and because by counting them, there is a risk that a sentence may become disproportionate.”
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.