Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 257 / Act 300 of 1949
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.902 (2026)

Violation of act; felony, penalty.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE


Act 300 of 1949


257.902 Violation of act; felony, penalty.

Sec. 902.

    Any person who is convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this act declared to constitute a felony, unless a different penalty is expressly provided herein, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than 1 year nor more than 5 years, or by a fine of not less than $500.00 nor more than $5,000.00, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1971–2016 · leading case: People v. Bewersdorf, 475 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Bewersdorf, 475 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. 1991). · cites it 6× “[2] MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602. [3] MCL 257.625(6); MSA 9.”
People v Doyle, 545 N.W.2d 627 (Mich. 1996). · cites it 6× “§ 257.902; M.S.A. § 9.2602 of the Motor Vehicle Code, can support charging the defendant as an habitual offender when it is a second or subsequent OUIL-3d conviction.”
People v. Allen, 884 N.W.2d 548 (Mich. 2016). · cites it 2× “625(6), as amended by 1987 PA 109 , and punishable under MCL 257.902 as a 5-year felony. The offense is now operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI) and is a 5-year felony prohibited by MCL 257.”
Michigan Educ. Employees Mut. Ins. v. Morris, 596 N.W.2d 142 (Mich. 1999). “2325(6), as amended by 1987 PA 109 , MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602. The current provision is MCL 257.”
People v. Miller, 522 N.W.2d 697 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “The imposition of both a fine and a term of imprisonment is provided for in MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602: 1 Any person who is convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this act declared to constitute a felony [MCL 257.”
People v. Bewersdorf, 450 N.W.2d 271 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Further support is found in § 902 of the Vehicle Code, MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602: Any person who is convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this act declared to constitute a felony, unless a different penalty is expressly provided herein, shall be punished by…”
People v. Tucker, 441 N.W.2d 59 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602. The habitual offender statute, fourth offender, contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, provides for enhanced punishment if "a person has been convicted of 3 or more felonies .”
Wayne Cnty. Prosecutor v. Wayne Circuit Judge, 397 N.W.2d 274 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “[MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602.] The probationary sentence imposed by Judge Bohn requires DeWitt to pay court costs of $165 per year, but makes no provision for a fine.”
People v. Pipkin, 287 N.W.2d 352 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). “MCL 257.625(c); MSA 9.2325(c). The felony carries a penalty of not less than one year nor more than five years imprisonment and/or a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000.”
People v. Hutchinson, 192 N.W.2d 395 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). ““On a second conviction under this section or a local ordinance substantially corresponding thereto, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by imprisonment for not more than 1 year and, in the discretion of the court, a fine of not more than $1,000.”
People v. Haker, 405 N.W.2d 204 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “The effect of this agreement was to provide that the defendant would face only a five-year maximum sentence, see MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602, instead of the life sentence he potentially *573 faced as an habitual offender.”
People v. Cousins, 493 N.W.2d 512 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “See MCL 257.902; MSA 9.2602. Neither subsection 5 nor subsection 6 of the statute modified the provision of subsection 4 that costs may be imposed upon a person found guilty of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
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.