Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.626c

Repealed. 2008, Act 463, Eff. Oct. 31, 2010.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE


Act 300 of 1949


257.626c Repealed. 2008, Act 463, Eff. Oct. 31, 2010.

    Repealed. 2008, Act 463, Eff. Oct. 31, 2010.

Compiler's Notes:

    The repealed section pertained to operation of vehicle resulting in serious impairment of body function as felony.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2023 · leading case: People v. Yamat
People v. Yamat (2006) mich · cites it 16× “" [27] *340 Utilizing the proper statutory definition of "operate," the prosecutor has clearly established sufficient probable cause that defendant violated the MCL 257.626c. Because the district court applied an erroneous definition of the term "operate," it abused its…”
People v. Yamat (2005) michctapp · cites it 6× “The prosecution appeals by leave granted the trial court’s order affirming the district court’s dismissal of a charge of felonious driving, MCL 257.626c, against defendant. We affirm.”
People v. Jones (2012) michctapp “479a(3), felonious driving, former MCL 257.626c, assaulting, resisting, or obstructing a police officer, MCL 750.”
People v. Pace (2015) michctapp “The legislative bill analyses, attached to the prosecution’s brief, suggest that the changes were made in response to concerns by legislators that [t]he current standard for determining whether a person is guilty of negligent homicide or felonious driving is ambiguous, based on…”
City of Plymouth v. Longeway (2012) michctapp “Yamat, 475 Mich at 51 . The defendant argued that he did not “operate” the vehicle because he did not have complete control over it.”
People of Michigan v. Timothy John Otto (2023) michctapp · cites it 5× “626b; and felonious driving (or reckless or negligent driving resulting in crippling injury), MCL 257.626c,6 repealed by 2008 PA 463 , effective October 31, 2020; see also MCL 5 MCL 257.”
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.