Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 49.153 (2026)
Prosecuting attorney; duties.
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Revised Statutes of 1846
R.S. of 1846
49.153 Prosecuting attorney; duties.
Sec. 53.
The prosecuting attorneys shall, in their respective counties, appear for the state or county, and prosecute or defend in all the courts of the county, all prosecutions, suits, applications and motions whether civil or criminal, in which the state or county may be a party or interested.
History: R.S. 1846, Ch. 14 ;-- CL 1857, 393 ;-- CL 1871, 529 ;-- How. 551 ;-- CL 1897, 2556 ;-- CL 1915, 2405 ;-- CL 1929, 1286 ;-- CL 1948, 49.153
Compiler's Notes:
The above section as originally enacted was numbered section 54.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1950–2026 · leading case: Cady v. Arenac Cnty., 574 F.3d 334 (6th Cir. 2009).
Cady v. Arenac Cnty., 574 F.3d 334 (6th Cir. 2009). “" Mich. Comp. Laws § 49.153 (2008). This formulation indicates that county attorneys in Michigan, like their counterparts in Ohio, are responsible for enforcing criminal laws on behalf of the state.”
In Re Contempt of Henry, 765 N.W.2d 44 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). “153 that states as follows: The prosecuting attorneys shall, in their respective counties, appear for the state or county, and prosecute or defend in all the courts of the county, all prosecutions, *667 suits, applications and motions whether civil or criminal, in which the…”
People v. Ford, 331 N.W.2d 878 (Mich. 1987). “" [7] MCL 49.153 et seq.; MSA 5.751 et seq. [8] Carmichael was decided on the trial court's erroneous failure to permit the defendant to withdraw his guilty plea before sentencing, when it was clear that the plea was involuntary because the defendant pled in the midst of…”
Messenger v. Ingham Cnty. Prosecutor, 591 N.W.2d 393 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). “7, § 4; MCL 49.153; MSA 5.751, or as the state's agent for effectuation of the obligations of parens patriae in matters concerning the custody or welfare of children, M.”
Wayne Cnty. Prosecutor v. Dep't of Corr., 548 N.W.2d 900 (Mich. 1996). “The Court of Appeals denied the motion. The department has announced that the Court of Appeals reading of the statutes would apply to Young and to parolees who commit new crimes after January 6, 1993, the date of the circuit judge's decision.”
Gavitt v. Ionia Cnty., 67 F. Supp. 3d 838 (E.D. Mich. 2014). “at 343 (quoting Mich. Comp. Laws § 49.153 (2008)). It construed Michigan’s statute to mean that “county attorneys in Michigan, like their counterparts in Ohio, are responsible for enforcing criminal laws on behalf of the state.”
People v. Young, 521 N.W.2d 340 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “We agree that the prosecutor had standing to file this action on behalf of the people of the State of Michigan pursuant to MCL 49.153; MSA 5.751. Thus, MCL 49.72; MSA 5.”
In Re Jagers, 568 N.W.2d 837 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). “However, there is no authority for the finding that the prosecutor may perform only those duties specifically assigned to him in the statutes and court rules.”
People v. Williams, 625 N.W.2d 132 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “In other words, as a matter of public policy, the code defines what acts are offenses *253 against the state.”
Fieger v. Cox, 734 N.W.2d 602 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “” Pursuant to MCL 49.153, prosecuting attorneys in Michigan possess broad discretion to investigate criminal wrongdoing, determine which applicable charges a defendant should face, and initiate and conduct criminal proceedings.”
In Re Wayne Cnty. Prosecutor, 591 N.W.2d 359 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). “He maintains that he is an interested party under MCL 49.153; MSA 5.751, which provides: The prosecuting attorneys shall, in their respective counties, appear for the state or county, and prosecute or defend in all the courts of the county, all prosecutions, suits, applications…”
Michigan Ex Rel Oakland Cnty. Prosecutor v. Dep't of Corr., 503 N.W.2d 465 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “Moreover, we note that, in bringing an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiff was acting in behalf of the people of the State of Michigan pursuant to MCL 49.153; MSA 5.751. Defendant Anderson also claims that the trial court’s order of a declaratory judgment was improper…”
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.