WRONGFUL IMPRISONMENT COMPENSATION ACT
Act 343 of 2016
691.1752 Definitions.
Sec. 2.
As used in this act:
(a) "Charges" means the criminal complaint filed against the plaintiff by a county prosecutor or the attorney general on behalf of the people of this state that resulted in the conviction and imprisonment of the plaintiff that are the subject of the claim for compensation under this act.
(b) "New evidence" means any evidence that was not presented in the proceedings leading to plaintiff's conviction, including new testimony, expert interpretation, the results of DNA testing, or other test results relating to evidence that was presented in the proceedings leading to plaintiff's conviction. New evidence does not include a recantation by a witness unless there is other evidence to support the recantation or unless the prosecuting attorney for the county in which the plaintiff was convicted or, if the department of attorney general prosecuted the case, the attorney general agrees that the recantation constitutes new evidence without other evidence to support the recantation.
(c) "Plaintiff" means the individual making a claim for compensation under this act. Plaintiff does not include the estate of an individual entitled to make a claim for compensation under this act, the personal representative of the estate, or any heir, devisee, beneficiary, or other person who is entitled under other law to pursue a claim for damages, injury, or death suffered by the individual.
(d) "State correctional facility" means a correctional facility maintained and operated by the department of corrections.
(e) "This state" means the state of Michigan and its political subdivisions, and the agencies, departments, commissions, and courts of this state and its political subdivisions.
History: 2016, Act 343, Eff. Mar. 29, 2017
Notes of Decisions
David a Maples v. State of Michigan (Mich. 2021).
· cites it 27× “In MCL 691.1752(b), the WICA defines “new evidence,” in part, as any evidence that was not presented in the proceedings leading to the plaintiff’s conviction.”
David a Maples v. State of Michigan (Mich. 2021).
· cites it 27× “In MCL 691.1752(b), the WICA defines “new evidence,” in part, as any evidence that was not presented in the proceedings leading to the plaintiff’s conviction.”
James Shepherd v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “” MCL 691.1752(b). When this Court vacated Shepherd’s conviction, it reviewed only the evidence admitted at trial.”
Chamar Avery v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 2× “MCL 691.1752(b) defines “new evidence” as follows: “New evidence” means any evidence that was not presented in the proceedings leading to plaintiff’s conviction, including new testimony, expert interpretation, the results of DNA testing, or other test results relating to…”
Larry Smith v. Wayne Cnty., Mich. (6th Cir. 2025).
· cites it 2× “Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1752 (e). Putting the provisions together, the court held that by accepting the settlement, Smith released all claims against Wayne County, including his Monell claim.”
Desmond Ricks v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “MCL 691.1752 outlines the definitions used in WICA, but does not define certain terms and phrases, such as “award of compensation,” “is subject to,” or “any other person.”
Ledura Watkins v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
“1755(1)(c) consistent with MCL 691.1752(B), which requires that “there is other evidence to support the recantation .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1752(B) — 1 case
Ledura Watkins v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
“1755(1)(c) consistent with MCL 691.1752(B), which requires that “there is other evidence to support the recantation .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1752(a) — 3 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1752(b) — 12 cases
David a Maples v. State of Michigan (Mich. 2021).
“In MCL 691.1752(b), the WICA defines “new evidence,” in part, as any evidence that was not presented in the proceedings leading to the plaintiff’s conviction.”
David a Maples v. State of Michigan (Mich. 2021).
“In MCL 691.1752(b), the WICA defines “new evidence,” in part, as any evidence that was not presented in the proceedings leading to the plaintiff’s conviction.”
James Shepherd v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“” MCL 691.1752(b). When this Court vacated Shepherd’s conviction, it reviewed only the evidence admitted at trial.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1752(d) — 2 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1752(e) — 3 cases
Desmond Ricks v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“MCL 691.1752 outlines the definitions used in WICA, but does not define certain terms and phrases, such as “award of compensation,” “is subject to,” or “any other person.”
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.