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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.7409 (2026)

Conviction or acquittal under federal law or law of other state as bar to prosecution.

✓ 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


333.7409 Conviction or acquittal under federal law or law of other state as bar to prosecution.

Sec. 7409.

    If a violation of this article is a violation of a federal law or the law of another state, a conviction or acquittal under federal law or the law of another state for the same act is a bar to prosecution in this state.

History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978

PopularName Notes:

Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1994–2017 · leading case: People v. Hermiz, 551 N.W.2d 389 (Mich. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Hermiz, 551 N.W.2d 389 (Mich. 1996). · cites it 14× “§ 333.7409; M.S.A. § 14.15(7409). I Hermiz In October, 1989, Issam Hermiz was indicted in federal court in the middle district of Florida for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, 21 U.”
People v. Hermiz, 611 N.W.2d 783 (Mich. 2000). · cites it 24× “III MCL 333.7409; MSA 14.15(7409) provides: If a violation of this article is a violation of a federal law or the law of another state, a conviction or acquittal under federal law or the law of another state for the same act is a bar to prosecution in this state.”
People v. Washington, 602 N.W.2d 824 (Mich. 1999). · cites it 20× “§ 333.7409; MSA 14.15(7409). We reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.”
People of Michigan v. Jason Charles Robar, 910 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “In Mezy , our Supreme Court addressed whether successive state and federal prosecutions for conspiracy to possess with intent to deliver cocaine were prohibited by the double jeopardy provisions of the United States and Michigan Constitutions, 17 or by MCL 333.7409 of the CSA,…”
People v. Zubke, 664 N.W.2d 751 (Mich. 2003). · cites it 8× “MCL 333.7409 generally precludes state prosecutions if the same act has been the predicate for a federal prosecution.”
People v. Davis, 695 N.W.2d 45 (Mich. 2005). · cites it 2× “Any abrogation based on double jeopardy principles of Michigan's sovereign power to prosecute offenders is a decision properly left to the people by amending the Constitution, and not to this Court.”
United States v. Edward Dominguez, 359 F.3d 839 (6th Cir. 2004). “The problem is illustrated by comparison to Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 333.7409 , which bars a Michigan prosecution for drug trafficking based upon acts that have already given rise to a criminal prosecution in another jurisdiction.”
People v. Hermiz, 526 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “Defendant claims on appeal that his state trial for conspiracy with intent to deliver in excess of 650 grams of cocaine constituted double jeopardy in violation of the Michigan statutory provision that forbids trial in narcotics cases in this state’s courts where the defendant…”
People v. Avila, 582 N.W.2d 838 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 8× “§ 333.7409; M.S.A. § 14.15(7409) controls.”
People v. Hermiz, 597 N.W.2d 218 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). “Despite the majority’s conclusion that there was no double jeopardy violation, all seven justices agreed that defendant Hermiz was entitled to relief on appeal in the form of a remand to the trial court for consideration of whether the state prosecution violated MCL 333.7409;…”
People of Michigan v. Steven Duane Dent (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “However, “[w]e review de novo a trial court’s decision that involves statutory interpretation [of MCL 333.7409].” Zubke, 469 Mich at 83 . Defendant was found guilty by the trial court of possession with intent to deliver and scheduled for sentencing on November 21, 2008.”
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.