Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 333 / Act 368 of 1978
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c (2026)

Manufacture of controlled substance; prohibited acts; violation as felony; exceptions; imposition of consecutive terms; court order to pay response activity costs; definitions.

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

PUBLIC HEALTH CODE


Act 368 of 1978


333.7401c Manufacture of controlled substance; prohibited acts; violation as felony; exceptions; imposition of consecutive terms; court order to pay response activity costs; definitions.

Sec. 7401c.

    (1) A person shall not do any of the following:

    (a) Own, possess, or use a vehicle, building, structure, place, or area that he or she knows or has reason to know is to be used as a location to manufacture a controlled substance in violation of section 7401 or a counterfeit substance or a controlled substance analogue in violation of section 7402.

    (b) Own or possess any chemical or any laboratory equipment that he or she knows or has reason to know is to be used for the purpose of manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of section 7401 or a counterfeit substance or a controlled substance analogue in violation of section 7402.

    (c) Provide any chemical or laboratory equipment to another person knowing or having reason to know that the other person intends to use that chemical or laboratory equipment for the purpose of manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of section 7401 or a counterfeit substance or a controlled substance analogue in violation of section 7402.

    (2) A person who violates this section is guilty of a felony punishable as follows:

    (a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b) to (f), by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

    (b) If the violation is committed in the presence of a minor, by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

    (c) If the violation involves the unlawful generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of a hazardous waste, by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

    (d) If the violation occurs within 500 feet of a residence, business establishment, school property, or church or other house of worship, by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

    (e) If the violation involves the possession, placement, or use of a firearm or any other device designed or intended to be used to injure another person, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years or a fine of not more than $100,000.00, or both.

    (f) If the violation involves or is intended to involve the manufacture of a substance described in section 7214(c)(ii), by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $25,000.00, or both.

    (3) This section does not apply to a violation involving only a substance described in section 7214(a)(iv) or marihuana, or both.

    (4) This section does not prohibit the person from being charged with, convicted of, or punished for any other violation of law committed by that person while violating or attempting to violate this section.

    (5) A term of imprisonment imposed under this section may be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment imposed for a violation of law arising out of the same transaction.

    (6) The court may, as a condition of sentence, order a person convicted of a violation punishable under subsection (2)(c) to pay response activity costs arising out of the violation.

    (7) As used in this section:

    (a) "Hazardous waste" means that term as defined in section 11103 of the natural resources and environmental protection act, 1994 PA 451, MCL 324.11103.

    (b) "Laboratory equipment" means any equipment, device, or container used or intended to be used in the process of manufacturing a controlled substance, counterfeit substance, or controlled substance analogue.

    (c) "Manufacture" means the production, preparation, propagation, compounding, conversion, or processing of a controlled substance, directly or indirectly by extraction from substances of natural origin, or independently by means of chemical synthesis, or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis. Manufacture does not include any of the following:

    (i) The packaging or repackaging of the substance or labeling or relabeling of its container.

    (ii) The preparation or compounding of a controlled substance by any of the following:

    (A) A practitioner as an incident to the practitioner's administering or dispensing of a controlled substance in the course of his or her professional practice.

    (B) A practitioner, or by the practitioner's authorized agent under his or her supervision, for the purpose of, or as an incident to, research, teaching, or chemical analysis and not for sale.

    (d) "Minor" means an individual less than 18 years of age.

    (e) "Response activity costs" means that term as defined in section 20101 of the natural resources and environmental protection act, 1994 PA 451, MCL 324.20101.

    (f) "School property" means that term as defined in section 7410.

    (g) "Vehicle" means that term as defined in section 79 of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.79.

History: Add. 2000, Act 314, Eff. Jan. 1, 2001 ;-- Am. 2003, Act 310, Eff. Apr. 1, 2004

PopularName Notes:

Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 81 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2003–2024 · leading case: People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 16× “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
People v. Heller, 891 N.W.2d 541 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “i The prosecutor charged Heller with operating or maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory, MCL 333.7401c; possession of methamphetamine, MCL 333.”
People of Michigan v. Richard Allen Baham, 909 N.W.2d 836 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “7401(2)(b)( i ) ;), operating or maintaining a laboratory involving methamphetamine, *839 MCL 333.7401c(2)(f) ; and possession of methamphetamine, MCL 333.”
People v. Seiders, 686 N.W.2d 821 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “7405(1)(d); and possession of methamphetamine (count V), MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i). Defendant was sentenced to prison terms of 78 to 180 months on count I, 78 to 360 months on count II, twelve months on count III, 4 to 20 months on count IV, and 78 to 180 months on count V.”
People v. Seiders, 686 N.W.2d 821 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “7405(1)(d); and possession of methamphetamine (count V), MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i). Defendant was sentenced to prison terms of 78 to 180 months on count I, 78 to 360 months on count II, twelve months on count III, 4 to 20 months on count IV, and 78 to 180 months on count V.”
People v. ROUTLEY, 777 N.W.2d 160 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 9× “" However, the Legislature has since amended MCL 333.7401c and defendant was convicted and sentenced under the newly enacted MCL 333.”
People v. Endres, 711 N.W.2d 398 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “, MCL 333.7401c, and the sentencing guidelines apply to controlled substance offenses that are designated as felonies by the Public Health Code, MCL 777.”
People v. Seiders, 259 Mich. App. 538 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of operating and maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory (count I), MCL 333.7401c(2)(a); operating and maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory near a residence (count n), MCL 333.”
People v. Gary, 849 N.W.2d 414 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Defendant appeals by delayed application for leave to appeal granted 1 from his plea-based conviction of operating or maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory, MCL 333.7401c(2)(a). He was sentenced to 38 to 120 months in prison.”
People of Michigan v. Eric Dean Wodkowski (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 16× “The statute further provides for increased punishment if aggravating circumstances are present.”
People v. Seiders, 675 N.W.2d 611 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 333.7401c(2)(a); operating and maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory near a residence (count II), M.”
People of Michigan v. Kay Margaret Oberle (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 9× “7401c(2)(f); owning a building intended to be used as a location to manufacture methamphetamine, MCL 333.7401c(1)(a); possession of methamphetamines, MCL 333.”
Show all 81 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(1) — 7 cases
People of Michigan v. Justin Christopher Farrsiar (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
People of Michigan v. Thomas Claud Kern (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
People of Michigan v. Robert Harley Davidson (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Robert Harley Davidson (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Eric Dean Wodkowski (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “The statute further provides for increased punishment if aggravating circumstances are present.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(1)(B) — 1 case
Huey 726378 v. Jackson (W.D. Mich. 2019).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(1)(a) — 10 cases
People of Michigan v. Kay Margaret Oberle (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “7401c(2)(f); owning a building intended to be used as a location to manufacture methamphetamine, MCL 333.7401c(1)(a); possession of methamphetamines, MCL 333.”
People of Michigan v. Kay Margaret Oberle (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Roger Leon Hunt Jr (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
People of Michigan v. Ryan Charles Diemond (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
People of Michigan v. Eric Dean Wodkowski (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “The statute further provides for increased punishment if aggravating circumstances are present.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(1)(b) — 13 cases
People of Michigan v. Roger Leon Hunt Jr (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
People of Michigan v. Douglas Eugene Huey (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Douglas Eugene Huey (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Levi Travis Dougherty (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Levi Travis Dougherty (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(1)(c) — 4 cases
People of Michigan v. Michael Brian McJunkin (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Michael Brian McJunkin (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Michael Brian McJunkin (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
People of Michigan v. Marcus Shepherd (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2) — 2 cases
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
People of Michigan v. Eric Dean Wodkowski (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “The statute further provides for increased punishment if aggravating circumstances are present.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2)(4) — 1 case
Huey 726378 v. Jackson (W.D. Mich. 2019).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2)(a) — 10 cases
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
People v. Seiders, 686 N.W.2d 821 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “7405(1)(d); and possession of methamphetamine (count V), MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i). Defendant was sentenced to prison terms of 78 to 180 months on count I, 78 to 360 months on count II, twelve months on count III, 4 to 20 months on count IV, and 78 to 180 months on count V.”
People v. Seiders, 686 N.W.2d 821 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “7405(1)(d); and possession of methamphetamine (count V), MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i). Defendant was sentenced to prison terms of 78 to 180 months on count I, 78 to 360 months on count II, twelve months on count III, 4 to 20 months on count IV, and 78 to 180 months on count V.”
People v. Gary, 849 N.W.2d 414 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Defendant appeals by delayed application for leave to appeal granted 1 from his plea-based conviction of operating or maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory, MCL 333.7401c(2)(a). He was sentenced to 38 to 120 months in prison.”
People v. Seiders, 259 Mich. App. 538 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of operating and maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory (count I), MCL 333.7401c(2)(a); operating and maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory near a residence (count n), MCL 333.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2)(b) — 7 cases
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
People of Michigan v. Eric Dean Wodkowski (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “The statute further provides for increased punishment if aggravating circumstances are present.”
People of Michigan v. Levi Travis Dougherty (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Levi Travis Dougherty (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Suzanne Fay Lafountain (Mich. 2014).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2)(c) — 8 cases
People v. ROUTLEY, 777 N.W.2d 160 (Mich. 2010). “" However, the Legislature has since amended MCL 333.7401c and defendant was convicted and sentenced under the newly enacted MCL 333.”
People of Michigan v. Eric Dean Wodkowski (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “The statute further provides for increased punishment if aggravating circumstances are present.”
People of Michigan v. Daniel Lee Gray (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. David Henry Johnson (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. David Henry Johnson (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2)(d) — 17 cases
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
People v. Seiders, 686 N.W.2d 821 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “7405(1)(d); and possession of methamphetamine (count V), MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i). Defendant was sentenced to prison terms of 78 to 180 months on count I, 78 to 360 months on count II, twelve months on count III, 4 to 20 months on count IV, and 78 to 180 months on count V.”
People v. Seiders, 686 N.W.2d 821 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “7405(1)(d); and possession of methamphetamine (count V), MCL 333.7403(2)(b)(i). Defendant was sentenced to prison terms of 78 to 180 months on count I, 78 to 360 months on count II, twelve months on count III, 4 to 20 months on count IV, and 78 to 180 months on count V.”
People v. ROUTLEY, 777 N.W.2d 160 (Mich. 2010). “" However, the Legislature has since amended MCL 333.7401c and defendant was convicted and sentenced under the newly enacted MCL 333.”
People v. Seiders, 259 Mich. App. 538 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of operating and maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory (count I), MCL 333.7401c(2)(a); operating and maintaining a methamphetamine laboratory near a residence (count n), MCL 333.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2)(e) — 2 cases
People of Michigan v. Suzanne Fay Lafountain (Mich. 2014).
People of Michigan v. Scott Reed Blaisdell (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(2)(f) — 54 cases
People of Michigan v. Richard Allen Baham, 909 N.W.2d 836 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “7401(2)(b)( i ) ;), operating or maintaining a laboratory involving methamphetamine, *839 MCL 333.7401c(2)(f) ; and possession of methamphetamine, MCL 333.”
People v. ROUTLEY, 777 N.W.2d 160 (Mich. 2010). “" However, the Legislature has since amended MCL 333.7401c and defendant was convicted and sentenced under the newly enacted MCL 333.”
People of Michigan v. Kevin Michael Barber (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
People of Michigan v. Kay Margaret Oberle (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “7401c(2)(f); owning a building intended to be used as a location to manufacture methamphetamine, MCL 333.7401c(1)(a); possession of methamphetamines, MCL 333.”
People of Michigan v. Kay Margaret Oberle (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(7)(b) — 1 case
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(7)(c) — 1 case
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(a) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Thomas Claud Kern (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(l)(a) — 1 case
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7401c(l)(b) — 1 case
People v. Meshell, 696 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “First, the language of the statute suggests that the Legislature did not intend multiple punishments under the different subdivisions of MCL 333.7401c(2). Denio, supra at 708 . MCL 333.”
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.