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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.159 (2026)

Emission need not be proved.

✓ current as of July 2026
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


750.159 Emission need not be proved.

Sec. 159.

    In any prosecution for sodomy, it shall not be necessary to prove emission, and any sexual penetration, however slight, shall be deemed sufficient to complete the crime specified in the next preceding section.

History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.159 ;-- Am. 1952, Act 73, Eff. Sept. 18, 1952

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1970–2023 · leading case: People v. Gonzalez, 671 N.W.2d 536 (Mich. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Gonzalez, 671 N.W.2d 536 (Mich. 2003). “1961, et seq, and burdens of proof thereunder, have no relevance to MCL 750.159(i)(1). Moreover, the panel's inclusion of a discussion of the federal statute, even as purported "legislative history" of our statute, is contrary to our canons of statutory construction.”
People v. Haynes, 760 N.W.2d 283 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “MCL 750.159; Carrier, supra at 166 . 3 For the same reasons that a conviction for bestiality under MCL 750.”
Tang v. Putruss, 521 F. Supp. 2d 600 (E.D. Mich. 2007). · cites it 2× “§ 1962 ; and (12) violation of MCL § 750.159. Several motions seeking summary judgment have been filed in this case.”
People v. Carrier, 254 N.W.2d 35 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 2× “An act of bestiality is not limited to copulation per anum, but includes an act of sexual connection between a human being and an animal, such as that alleged to have occurred here.”
People v. Stinson, 227 N.W.2d 303 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). “According to MCLA 750.159; MSA 28.356, "any penetration, however, slight”, was sufficient to establish the offense of sodomy.”
People of Michigan v. Terrance Anthony Furline (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “” MCL 750.159(g). To prove a “pattern of racketeering,” the plaintiff must show “Pattern of racketeering activity” means not less than 2 incidents of racketeering to which all of the following characteristics apply: (i) The incidents have the same or a substantially similar…”
People of Michigan v. Terrance Anthony Furline (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “” MCL 750.159(g). To prove a “pattern of racketeering,” the plaintiff must show “Pattern of racketeering activity” means not less than 2 incidents of racketeering to which all of the following characteristics apply: (i) The incidents have the same or a substantially similar…”
People v. Zinn, 234 N.W.2d 452 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). “MCLA 750.159; MSA 28.356. At trial the complaining witness testified that one night a few days after his arrival in the Muskegon County Jail, he awoke to find his blanket on fire.”
People of Michigan v. Antonio Ratcliff (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Defendant’s roommate, who had lived with defendant for three years, testified that while showering on the morning of March 15, 2014, she heard her dog howl, that she then left the shower running, and that she proceeded to walk toward the living room to investigate.”
Axle of Dearborn, Inc. v. Detroit IT, LLC (E.D. Mich. 2023). “§ 1962 (d) (Count II); Michigan RICO Statute MCL 750.159(f) (Count III); Breach of Contract (Count IV); Fraud and/or Misrepresentation (Count V); Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 8 U.”
Furline v. Cheeks (E.D. Mich. 2023). “LAWS §§ 750.159(i)(1), 769.12. “In Michigan, sentences within a correctly scored guidelines range are presumptively proportionate.”
People v. Ford, 184 N.W.2d 473 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 2× “This is the principal element of the crime as defined by MCLA § 750.159 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 28.356).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.159(f) — 1 case
Axle of Dearborn, Inc. v. Detroit IT, LLC (E.D. Mich. 2023). “§ 1962 (d) (Count II); Michigan RICO Statute MCL 750.159(f) (Count III); Breach of Contract (Count IV); Fraud and/or Misrepresentation (Count V); Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 8 U.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.159(g) — 2 cases
People of Michigan v. Terrance Anthony Furline (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “” MCL 750.159(g). To prove a “pattern of racketeering,” the plaintiff must show “Pattern of racketeering activity” means not less than 2 incidents of racketeering to which all of the following characteristics apply: (i) The incidents have the same or a substantially similar…”
People of Michigan v. Terrance Anthony Furline (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “” MCL 750.159(g). To prove a “pattern of racketeering,” the plaintiff must show “Pattern of racketeering activity” means not less than 2 incidents of racketeering to which all of the following characteristics apply: (i) The incidents have the same or a substantially similar…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.159(i)(1) — 2 cases
People v. Gonzalez, 671 N.W.2d 536 (Mich. 2003). “1961, et seq, and burdens of proof thereunder, have no relevance to MCL 750.159(i)(1). Moreover, the panel's inclusion of a discussion of the federal statute, even as purported "legislative history" of our statute, is contrary to our canons of statutory construction.”
Furline v. Cheeks (E.D. Mich. 2023). “LAWS §§ 750.159(i)(1), 769.12. “In Michigan, sentences within a correctly scored guidelines range are presumptively proportionate.”
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.