Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 750 / Act 328 of 1931

Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d

Use of internet or computer system; prohibited conduct; violation; penalty; jurisdiction; order to reimburse state or local governmental unit; definitions.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE


Act 328 of 1931


750.145d Use of internet or computer system; prohibited conduct; violation; penalty; jurisdiction; order to reimburse state or local governmental unit; definitions.

Sec. 145d.

    (1) A person shall not use the internet or a computer, computer program, computer network, or computer system to communicate with any person for the purpose of doing any of the following:

    (a) Committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or soliciting another person to commit conduct proscribed under section 145a, 145c, 157c, 349, 350, 520b, 520c, 520d, 520e, or 520g, or section 5 of 1978 PA 33, MCL 722.675, in which the victim or intended victim is a minor or is believed by that person to be a minor.

    (b) Committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or soliciting another person to commit conduct proscribed under section 411h or 411i.

    (c) Committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or soliciting another person to commit conduct proscribed under chapter XXXIII or section 327, 327a, 328, or 411a(2).

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

    (a) If the underlying crime is a misdemeanor or a felony with a maximum term of imprisonment of less than 1 year, the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.

    (b) If the underlying crime is a misdemeanor or a felony with a maximum term of imprisonment of 1 year or more but less than 2 years, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.

    (c) If the underlying crime is a misdemeanor or a felony with a maximum term of imprisonment of 2 years or more but less than 4 years, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.

    (d) If the underlying crime is a felony with a maximum term of imprisonment of 4 years or more but less than 10 years, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.

    (e) If the underlying crime is a felony punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years or more but less than 15 years, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 15 years or a fine of not more than $10,000.00, or both.

    (f) If the underlying crime is a felony punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 15 years or more or for life, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $20,000.00, or both.

    (3) The court may order that a term of imprisonment imposed under this section be served consecutively to any term of imprisonment imposed for conviction of the underlying offense.

    (4) This section does not prohibit a 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, including the underlying offense.

    (5) This section applies regardless of whether the person is convicted of committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or soliciting another person to commit the underlying offense.

    (6) A violation or attempted violation of this section occurs if the communication originates in this state, is intended to terminate in this state, or is intended to terminate with a person who is in this state.

    (7) A violation or attempted violation of this section may be prosecuted in any jurisdiction in which the communication originated or terminated.

    (8) The court may order a person convicted of violating this section to reimburse this state or a local unit of government of this state for expenses incurred in relation to the violation in the same manner that expenses may be ordered to be reimbursed under section 1f of chapter IX of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 769.1f.

    (9) As used in this section:

    (a) "Computer" means any connected, directly interoperable or interactive device, equipment, or facility that uses a computer program or other instructions to perform specific operations including logical, arithmetic, or memory functions with or on computer data or a computer program and that can store, retrieve, alter, or communicate the results of the operations to a person, computer program, computer, computer system, or computer network. Computer includes a computer game device or a cellular telephone, personal digital assistant (PDA), or other handheld device.

    (b) "Computer network" means the interconnection of hardwire or wireless communication lines with a computer through remote terminals, or a complex consisting of 2 or more interconnected computers.

    (c) "Computer program" means a series of internal or external instructions communicated in a form acceptable to a computer that directs the functioning of a computer, computer system, or computer network in a manner designed to provide or produce products or results from the computer, computer system, or computer network.

    (d) "Computer system" means a set of related, connected or unconnected, computer equipment, devices, software, or hardware.

    (e) "Device" includes, but is not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, electrochemical, biochemical, hydraulic, optical, or organic object that performs input, output, or storage functions by the manipulation of electronic, magnetic, or other impulses.

    (f) "Internet" means that term as defined in section 230 of the communications act of 1934, 47 USC 230.

    (g) "Minor" means an individual who is less than 18 years of age.

History: Add. 1999, Act 32, Eff. Aug. 1, 1999 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 235, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 185, Eff. Sept. 18, 2000 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 353, Eff. Jan. 1, 2013

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: People v. Meyers
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Meyers (2002) michctapp · cites it 27× “The prosecutor charged Meyers with violating MCL 750.145d, 1 which, at the time Meyers committed the offense, provided in pertinent part: (1) A person shall not use the internet or a computer, computer program, computer network, or computer system to communicate with any person…”
People v. Kowalski (2011) mich · cites it 6× “The instructions given at trial did not properly apprise the jury of the actus reus of the accosting a minor statute and were therefore plainly erroneous. However, we conclude that, regardless of whether defendant waived review of the jury instructions, the instructions did not…”
People v. Cervi (2006) michctapp · cites it 21× “At issue is MCL 750.145d, a statute which criminalizes use of “the internet or a computer .”
People v. Tombs (2005) mich · cites it 6× “A jury convicted defendant of (1) distributing or promoting child sexually abusive material, MCL 750.”
People v. Aspy (2011) michctapp · cites it 7× “145d(l)(a), punishable under MCL 750.145d(2)(f). The trial court sentenced him to 30 months’ to 20 years’ imprisonment for each conviction, to be served concurrently.”
People v. Tombs (2004) michctapp · cites it 6× “145c(4) (possession of child sexually abusive material), MCL 750.145d. The trial court sentenced 1 defendant to concurrent prison terms of seventeen to eighty-four months’ imprisonment for his conviction of distributing or promoting child sexually abusive material, sixteen to…”
People v. Golba (2007) michctapp · cites it 4× “The defendant *921 was charged with violating MCL 750.145d, which at the time of the alleged offense provided: "(1) A person shall not use the internet or a computer, computer program, computer network, or computer system to communicate with any person for the purpose of doing…”
Lo, Ex Parte John Christopher (2013) texcrimapp · cites it 2× “2d 356, 364-65, 366-67 (2006) (upholding constitutionality of MCL 750.145d, which provided: "A person shall not use the internet or a computer .”
People v. Althoff (2008) michctapp · cites it 2× “The Court acknowledged that “[t]here may be other cases in which a defendant convicted of violating MCL 750.145d need not register under SORA because the victim was over the age of eighteen or the offense was not inherently sexual,” and that “[o]nly after analyzing the facts of…”
People v. Dagwan (2006) michctapp “See MCL 750.145d. Further, we conclude that a reasonable person would know that computers can contain illegal child sexually abusive material in the form of stored electronic images.”
People v. Adkins (2006) michctapp “145c(2); and using a computer or the Internet to attempt to commit child sexually abusive activity, MCL 750.145d(l)(a) and (2)(f), after initiating a sexually explicit Internet dialogue with, and arranging to meet, an undercover police officer posing as a 14-year-old boy.”
Does v. Snyder (2015) mied “First, whereas § 750.145d prohibits the online solicitation of minors, SORA's Internet provisions create a database of online identities of persons convicted of sex offenses which makes easier the investigation of crimes in which a minor (or adult) has been contacted through an…”
Show all 33 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(1) — 4 cases
People of Michigan v. Joseph Peter Sturza (2019) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Matthew Galloway (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Matthew Galloway (2017) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Jonathan Ryan Hastings (2018) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(1)(a) — 7 cases
People v. Kowalski (2011) mich “The instructions given at trial did not properly apprise the jury of the actus reus of the accosting a minor statute and were therefore plainly erroneous. However, we conclude that, regardless of whether defendant waived review of the jury instructions, the instructions did not…”
People v. Russell (2009) mich
People of Michigan v. Joseph Peter Sturza (2019) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Michael Joseph Ettenberger (2016) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Jonathan Ryan Hastings (2018) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(2) — 1 case
People v. Meyers (2002) michctapp “The prosecutor charged Meyers with violating MCL 750.145d, 1 which, at the time Meyers committed the offense, provided in pertinent part: (1) A person shall not use the internet or a computer, computer program, computer network, or computer system to communicate with any person…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(2)(a) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Jonathan Ryan Hastings (2018) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(2)(c) — 2 cases
Doe v. Nessel (2023) mied
People of Michigan v. Cora Ladane Lymon (2024) mich
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(2)(d) — 2 cases
20250117_C367825_41_367825.Opn.Pdf (2025) michctapp
20250219_C372314_31_372314.Opn.Pdf (2025) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(2)(e) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Adalberto Garcia (2024) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(2)(f) — 5 cases
People v. Aspy (2011) michctapp “145d(l)(a), punishable under MCL 750.145d(2)(f). The trial court sentenced him to 30 months’ to 20 years’ imprisonment for each conviction, to be served concurrently.”
People of Michigan v. Michael Joseph Ettenberger (2016) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Peter Farris Casey II (2023) michctapp
20250117_C367825_41_367825.Opn.Pdf (2025) michctapp
20250219_C372314_31_372314.Opn.Pdf (2025) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(6) — 1 case
People v. Aspy (2011) michctapp “145d(l)(a), punishable under MCL 750.145d(2)(f). The trial court sentenced him to 30 months’ to 20 years’ imprisonment for each conviction, to be served concurrently.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(9)(a) — 3 cases
People of Michigan v. Michael Joseph Ettenberger (2016) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Jonathan Ryan Hastings (2018) michctapp
People of Michigan v. Julie Ann Zimmerman (2026) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(9)(g) — 1 case
People v. Cervi (2006) michctapp “At issue is MCL 750.145d, a statute which criminalizes use of “the internet or a computer .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(l) — 2 cases
People v. Tombs (2004) michctapp “145c(4) (possession of child sexually abusive material), MCL 750.145d. The trial court sentenced 1 defendant to concurrent prison terms of seventeen to eighty-four months’ imprisonment for his conviction of distributing or promoting child sexually abusive material, sixteen to…”
People v. Cervi (2006) michctapp “At issue is MCL 750.145d, a statute which criminalizes use of “the internet or a computer .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(l)(a) — 4 cases
People v. Cervi (2006) michctapp “At issue is MCL 750.145d, a statute which criminalizes use of “the internet or a computer .”
People v. Aspy (2011) michctapp “145d(l)(a), punishable under MCL 750.145d(2)(f). The trial court sentenced him to 30 months’ to 20 years’ imprisonment for each conviction, to be served concurrently.”
People v. Adkins (2006) michctapp “145c(2); and using a computer or the Internet to attempt to commit child sexually abusive activity, MCL 750.145d(l)(a) and (2)(f), after initiating a sexually explicit Internet dialogue with, and arranging to meet, an undercover police officer posing as a 14-year-old boy.”
People v. Russell (On Remand) (2008) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.145d(l)(b) — 2 cases
People v. Meyers (2002) michctapp “The prosecutor charged Meyers with violating MCL 750.145d, 1 which, at the time Meyers committed the offense, provided in pertinent part: (1) A person shall not use the internet or a computer, computer program, computer network, or computer system to communicate with any person…”
People v. Althoff (2008) michctapp “The Court acknowledged that “[t]here may be other cases in which a defendant convicted of violating MCL 750.145d need not register under SORA because the victim was over the age of eighteen or the offense was not inherently sexual,” and that “[o]nly after analyzing the facts of…”
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.