Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.159r (2026)

Sale of seized property by unit of government; disposal of received money; order of priority; appointment, compensation, and duties of receiver.

✓ 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


750.159r Sale of seized property by unit of government; disposal of received money; order of priority; appointment, compensation, and duties of receiver.

Sec. 159r.

    (1) If property is criminally or civilly forfeited under this chapter, the unit of government that seized or filed a lien against the property may sell the property that is not required to be destroyed by law and that is not harmful to the public and may dispose of the money received from the sale of the property and any money, negotiable instrument, security, or other thing of value that is forfeited pursuant to this chapter in the following order of priority:

    (a) Pay any outstanding security interest or unpaid land contract balance of a secured party or land contract vendor who did not have prior actual knowledge of, or consent to the commission of, the crime.

    (b) Satisfy any order of restitution in the prosecution for the crime.

    (c) Pay the claim of each person who shows that he or she is a victim of the crime to the extent that the claim is not covered by an order of restitution.

    (d) Pay any valid outstanding lien against the property that has been imposed by a governmental unit.

    (e) Pay the proper expenses of the proceedings for forfeiture and sale, including, but not limited to, expenses incurred during the seizure process and expenses for maintaining custody of the property, advertising, and court costs.

    (f) The balance remaining after the payment of restitution, the claims of victims, outstanding liens, and expenses shall be distributed by the court having jurisdiction over the forfeiture proceedings to the unit or units of government substantially involved in effecting the forfeiture. The money received by a unit of government under this subdivision shall be used to enhance enforcement of the criminal laws.

    (2) In the course of selling real property pursuant to subsection (1), the court that enters an order or sentence of forfeiture, on motion of the unit of government to which the property is forfeited, may appoint a receiver to dispose of the real property forfeited. The receiver is entitled to reasonable compensation. The receiver may do all of the following:

    (a) List the forfeited real property for sale.

    (b) Make whatever arrangements are necessary for maintaining and preserving the forfeited real property.

    (c) Accept offers to purchase the forfeited real property.

    (d) Execute instruments transferring title to the forfeited real property.

History: Add. 1995, Act 187, Eff. Apr. 1, 1996

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2001–2005 · leading case: Echelon Homes, LLC v. Carter Lumber Co., 694 N.W.2d 544 (Mich. 2005).
Echelon Homes, LLC v. Carter Lumber Co., 694 N.W.2d 544 (Mich. 2005). · cites it 2× “159q(1)(b) ("had prior actual knowledge of the commission of an offense"); MCL 750.159r(1)(a) ("who did not have prior actual knowledge"); MCL 750.”
In Re Forfeiture of $1,923,235, 637 N.W.2d 247 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “Reasonable attorney fees are excluded from forfeiture under the act and, therefore, are not subject to disposition under MCL 750.159r. Furthermore, we make no determination regarding whether the $94,039.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.159r(1)(a) — 1 case
Echelon Homes, LLC v. Carter Lumber Co., 694 N.W.2d 544 (Mich. 2005). “159q(1)(b) ("had prior actual knowledge of the commission of an offense"); MCL 750.159r(1)(a) ("who did not have prior actual knowledge"); MCL 750.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.159r(l)(a) — 1 case
Echelon Homes, LLC v. Carter Lumber Co., 694 N.W.2d 544 (Mich. 2005). “159q(1)(b) ("had prior actual knowledge of the commission of an offense"); MCL 750.159r(1)(a) ("who did not have prior actual knowledge"); MCL 750.”
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.