THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE
Act 328 of 1931
750.165 Failure to support spouse or child as required by court order; violation as felony; penalty; applicability; cash bond; suspension of sentence; bond; order of restitution; "state disbursement unit" or "SDU" defined.
Sec. 165.
(1) If the court orders an individual to pay support for the individual's former or current spouse, or for a child of the individual, and the individual does not pay the support in the amount or at the time stated in the order, the individual is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years or by a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both.
(2) This section does not apply unless the court in which the support order was issued had personal jurisdiction over the individual ordered to pay support.
(3) Unless the individual deposits a cash bond of not less than $500.00 or 25% of the arrearage, whichever is greater, upon arrest for a violation of this section, the individual shall remain in custody until the arraignment. If the individual remains in custody, the court shall address the amount of the cash bond at the arraignment and at the preliminary examination and, except for good cause shown on the record, shall order the bond to be continued at not less than $500.00 or 25% of the arrearage, whichever is greater. At the court's discretion, the court may set the cash bond at an amount not more than 100% of the arrearage and add to that amount the amount of the costs that the court may require under section 31(3) of the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.631. The court shall specify that the cash bond amount be entered into the law enforcement information network. If a bench warrant under section 31 of the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.631, is outstanding for an individual when the individual is arrested for a violation of this section, the court shall notify the court handling the civil support case under the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.601 to 552.650, that the bench warrant may be recalled.
(4) The court may suspend the sentence of an individual convicted under this section if the individual files with the court a bond in the amount and with the sureties the court requires. At a minimum, the bond must be conditioned on the individual's compliance with the support order. If the court suspends a sentence under this subsection and the individual does not comply with the support order or another condition on the bond, the court may order the individual to appear and show cause why the court should not impose the sentence and enforce the bond. After the hearing, the court may enforce the bond or impose the sentence, or both, or may permit the filing of a new bond and again suspend the sentence. The court shall order a support amount enforced under this section to be paid to the clerk or friend of the court or to the state disbursement unit.
(5) An order for restitution for a violation of this section shall not include a separate award for the unpaid amount in arrearage under the support order. The restitution order shall reference the support order and direct the individual to pay the unpaid amount in arrearage under the support order pursuant to the support order. The court may impose such terms and conditions in the restitution order as are appropriate to ensure compliance with payment of the arrearage due under the support order. The court may order additional restitution as provided under the William Van Regenmorter crime victim's rights act, 1985 PA 87, MCL 780.751 to 780.834.
(6) As used in this section, "state disbursement unit" or "SDU" means the entity established in section 6 of the office of child support act, 1971 PA 174, MCL 400.236.
History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- Am. 1939, Act 89, Eff. Sept. 29, 1939 ;-- CL 1948, 750.165 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 152, Imd. Eff. Nov. 3, 1999 ;-- Am. 2004, Act 570, Imd. Eff. Jan. 3, 2005 ;-- Am. 2014, Act 377, Eff. Mar. 17, 2015
FormerLaw Notes:
See section 1 of Act 276 of 1917, being CL 1929, § 12781.
Notes of Decisions
People of Michigan v. Selesa Arrosieur Likine, 492 Mich. 367 (Mich. 2012).
· cites it 122× “We granted leave to consider the constitutionality of the Court of Appeals’ ruling in Adams and now clarify that, while inability to pay is not a defense to felony nonsupport pursuant to MCL 750.”
People v. Monaco, 710 N.W.2d 46 (Mich. 2006).
· cites it 80× “Under the "time ordered theory," the defendant violates MCL 750.165 when he fails to make the weekly support payment.”
People v. Adams, 683 N.W.2d 729 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 11× “This case requires us to analyze the language of MCL 750.165 to determine whether felony nonsupport is a strict-liability offense.”
People v. Westman, 685 N.W.2d 423 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 14× “Defendant appeals as of right from his guilty-plea conviction of felony failure to pay child support, MCL 750.165, and of being an habitual offender, third-offense, MCL 769.”
People v. Westman, 685 N.W.2d 423 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 14× “Defendant appeals as of right from his guilty-plea conviction of felony failure to pay child support, MCL 750.165, and to being an habitual offender, third-offense, MCL 769.”
People v. Monaco, 686 N.W.2d 790 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 12× “Defendant appeals by leave granted the trial court’s order denying his motion to dismiss the charge of failure to pay court-ordered support (felony nonsupport), MCL 750.165, or quash the bindover. We affirm.”
People v. Likine, 794 N.W.2d 85 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 8× “Defendant appeals as of right her jury conviction of failing to pay child support in violation of MCL 750.165, for which she was sentenced to probation for one year.”
People v. Iannucci, 887 N.W.2d 817 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “Defendant, proceeding in propria persona, appeals his conviction after a jury trial of failure to pay child support, MCL 750.165, for which he was sentenced to 60 months’ probation, with five days to be served in jail, and ordered to pay $21,951 in unpaid child support.”
People v. Hershey, 844 N.W.2d 127 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
“In this criminal case involving the failure to pay child support, MCL 750.165, we consider the appeal of defendant, Joseph Frank Hershey, as on leave granted pursuant to a remand order from our Supreme Court.”
People v. Schumacher, 740 N.W.2d 534 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
“In Adams, this Court analyzed MCL 750.165 to determine whether felony nonsupport is a strict-liability offense.”
People v. Adams, 683 N.W.2d 729 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 11× “This case requires us to analyze the language of MCL 750.165 to determine whether felony nonsupport is a strict-liability offense.”
People v. Ditton, 261 N.W.2d 182 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977).
· cites it 4× “Defendant appeals his conviction for nonsupport charged to have commenced on or about May 28, 1974, and continuing thereafter, and leaving the state, contrary to MCLA 750.165; MSA 28.362, a felony. He was convicted by a jury and from a sentence of one to two years appeals of…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.165(1) — 15 cases
People v. Monaco, 710 N.W.2d 46 (Mich. 2006).
“Under the "time ordered theory," the defendant violates MCL 750.165 when he fails to make the weekly support payment.”
People of Michigan v. Selesa Arrosieur Likine, 492 Mich. 367 (Mich. 2012).
“We granted leave to consider the constitutionality of the Court of Appeals’ ruling in Adams and now clarify that, while inability to pay is not a defense to felony nonsupport pursuant to MCL 750.”
People v. Iannucci, 887 N.W.2d 817 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“Defendant, proceeding in propria persona, appeals his conviction after a jury trial of failure to pay child support, MCL 750.165, for which he was sentenced to 60 months’ probation, with five days to be served in jail, and ordered to pay $21,951 in unpaid child support.”
People v. Adams, 683 N.W.2d 729 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“This case requires us to analyze the language of MCL 750.165 to determine whether felony nonsupport is a strict-liability offense.”
People v. Westman, 685 N.W.2d 423 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“Defendant appeals as of right from his guilty-plea conviction of felony failure to pay child support, MCL 750.165, and of being an habitual offender, third-offense, MCL 769.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.165(2) — 4 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.165(3) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Selesa Arrosieur Likine, 492 Mich. 367 (Mich. 2012).
“We granted leave to consider the constitutionality of the Court of Appeals’ ruling in Adams and now clarify that, while inability to pay is not a defense to felony nonsupport pursuant to MCL 750.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.165(4) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Selesa Arrosieur Likine, 492 Mich. 367 (Mich. 2012).
“We granted leave to consider the constitutionality of the Court of Appeals’ ruling in Adams and now clarify that, while inability to pay is not a defense to felony nonsupport pursuant to 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.