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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224 (2026)

Weapons; manufacture, sale, or possession as felony; violation as felony; penalty; exceptions; "muffler" or "silencer" defined.

✓ 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


750.224 Weapons; manufacture, sale, or possession as felony; violation as felony; penalty; exceptions; "muffler" or "silencer" defined.

Sec. 224.

    (1) A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or possess any of the following:

    (a) A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

    (b) A muffler or silencer.

    (c) A bomb or bombshell.

    (d) A blackjack, slungshot, billy, metallic knuckles, sand club, sand bag, or bludgeon.

    (e) A device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance designed to render a person temporarily or permanently disabled by the ejection, release, or emission of a gas or other substance.

    (2) A person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or a fine of not more than $2,500.00, or both.

    (3) Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following:

    (a) A self-defense spray or foam device as defined in section 224d.

    (b) A person manufacturing firearms, explosives, or munitions of war by virtue of a contract with a department of the government of the United States.

    (c) A person licensed by the secretary of the treasury of the United States or the secretary's delegate to manufacture, sell, or possess a machine gun, or a device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance described in subsection (1).

    (4) As used in this chapter, "muffler" or "silencer" means 1 or more of the following:

    (a) A device for muffling, silencing, or deadening the report of a firearm.

    (b) A combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a muffler or silencer.

    (c) A part, designed or redesigned, and intended only for use in assembling or fabricating a muffler or silencer.

History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.224 ;-- Am. 1959, Act 175, Eff. Mar. 19, 1960 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 564, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 1978 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 346, Eff. Mar. 31, 1981 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 321, Eff. Mar. 28, 1991 ;-- Am. 1991, Act 33, Imd. Eff. June 10, 1991 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 401, Eff. Dec. 28, 2006

Constitutionality Notes:

    The Michigan supreme court held that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the defendant in People v Lynch, 410 Mich 343; 301 NW2d 796 (1981).

FormerLaw Notes:

    See section 3 of Act 372 of 1927, being CL 1929, § 16751; and Act 206 of 1929.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 84 cases (29 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case: People v. Lynch, 301 N.W.2d 796 (Mich. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Lynch, 301 N.W.2d 796 (Mich. 1981). · cites it 6× “" MCL 750.224; MSA 28.421. The italicized language was added by a 1929 amendment.”
People v. Perkins, 703 N.W.2d 448 (Mich. 2005). · cites it 2× “The second issue is whether the prosecution is always required to show that a person convicted of a specified felony has not had his or her right to possess a firearm restored pursuant to MCL 750.224(2)(b), or whether the prosecution's burden to disprove restoration only arises…”
Jay Isaac Hollis v. Loretta Lynch, 827 F.3d 436 (5th Cir. 2016). “17-A, §§ 1051-1052; Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224 ; Mo. Rev. Stat.”
People v. Hill, 446 N.W.2d 140 (Mich. 1989). · cites it 2× “Accordingly, we find that MCL 750.224(b); MSA 28.421(2) was intended to prohibit the constructive and joint possession of short-barreled shotguns.”
People v. Guy, 270 N.W.2d 662 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 6× “We also agree that wherever possible an act should be construed to avoid unconstitutionality, if necessary severing unenforceable provisions. After much deliberation, however, we cannot see how the statutory provision in question can be saved in this case.”
Goldy v. Tierney, 548 F. Supp. 2d 422 (E.D. Mich. 2008). · cites it 10× “Following a jury trial in Oakland County Circuit Court, Petitioner was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon in a vehicle, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.227 (2), and possessing a prohibited weapon (muffler or silencer), Mich.”
Mich. Gun Owners, Inc. v. Ann Arbor Pub. Sch., 918 N.W.2d 756 (Mich. 2018). “451a did not permit a police officer to engage in the solicitation of a prostitute, there would have been no need for the Legislature to enact MCL 750.”
People v. Lorentzen, 194 N.W.2d 827 (Mich. 1972). · cites it 2× “[8] MCLA 750.224; MSA 28.421. [9] MCLA 750.321; MSA 28.”
People v. Malik, 245 N.W.2d 434 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “Defendant appeals his jury con *134 viction of possession of a dangerous weapon, MCLA 750.224; MSA 28.421. Relevant facts appear to be undisputed.”
People v. Maxson, 449 N.W.2d 422 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “MCL 750.224; MSA 28.421. Subsequently, he pled guilty to habitual offender, third felony.”
Capital Area Dist. Library v. Michigan Open Carry, Inc., 826 N.W.2d 736 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). “In addition to the above laws addressing where firearms may not be possessed, state law also prohibits the following, subject to certain exceptions: the possession of a machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than one shot without manual…”
Tuggle v. Dep't of State Police, 712 N.W.2d 750 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “14 Defendants argued before the trial court that the plain language of MCL 750.224(6), which states that a “ ‘specified felony’ means a felony in which 1 or more of the following circumstances exist,” indicates that the Legislature contemplated and accepted the fact that some…”
Show all 84 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(1) — 12 cases
King v. R G Indus., Inc, 451 N.W.2d 874 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990).
People v. Beasley, 497 N.W.2d 200 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
People of Michigan v. Arthur Lee Hall (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
People of Michigan v. Myles Russell Jarrell (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
People Of Mi V Myles Russell Jarrell (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(1)(a) — 5 cases
People of Michigan v. Paul Dean Smith (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
People of Michigan v. Jonathan Michael Mullen (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
Smith v. Carl (E.D. Mich. 2023).
20250109_C368658_28_368658.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
People of Michigan v. Charles Stanley Bally (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(1)(d) — 4 cases
People of Michigan v. Frederick John Dummer V (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
People of Michigan v. MacCio Cortez Williams (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. MacCio Cortez Williams (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Hector William Galindez (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(10) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Joell Lawrence Hanks II (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(2)(b) — 1 case
People v. Perkins, 703 N.W.2d 448 (Mich. 2005). “The second issue is whether the prosecution is always required to show that a person convicted of a specified felony has not had his or her right to possess a firearm restored pursuant to MCL 750.224(2)(b), or whether the prosecution's burden to disprove restoration only arises…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(6) — 1 case
Tuggle v. Dep't of State Police, 712 N.W.2d 750 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “14 Defendants argued before the trial court that the plain language of MCL 750.224(6), which states that a “ ‘specified felony’ means a felony in which 1 or more of the following circumstances exist,” indicates that the Legislature contemplated and accepted the fact that some…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(F) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Richard Anthony Strong (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(b) — 2 cases
People v. Hill, 446 N.W.2d 140 (Mich. 1989). “Accordingly, we find that MCL 750.224(b); MSA 28.421(2) was intended to prohibit the constructive and joint possession of short-barreled shotguns.”
People of Michigan v. Gene Nelson Goodman (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f) — 9 cases
United States v. Morris, 377 F. Supp. 2d 630 (E.D. Mich. 2005).
United States v. Williams, 122 F. Supp. 2d 782 (E.D. Mich. 2000).
United States v. Wegrzyn, 106 F. Supp. 2d 959 (W.D. Mich. 2000).
Novak v. Federspiel (E.D. Mich. 2023).
Morgan v. Par. (E.D. Mich. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f)(1) — 3 cases
in Re Gregg Bryan Knight (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
People of Michigan v. Ray Lazell Jackson (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
in Re Timothy Erik Schultz (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f)(10) — 2 cases
in Re Gregg Bryan Knight (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
in Re Timothy Erik Schultz (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f)(2) — 4 cases
United States v. Williams, 122 F. Supp. 2d 782 (E.D. Mich. 2000).
in Re Gregg Bryan Knight (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
People of Michigan v. Darius Dawan Powell (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
People of Michigan v. Christopher Lewis Greer (Mich. Ct. App. 2026).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f)(2)(a) — 2 cases
United States v. Williams, 122 F. Supp. 2d 782 (E.D. Mich. 2000).
People of Michigan v. Matthew Miquel Jones (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f)(3) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Darius Dawan Powell (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f)(6)(i) — 1 case
United States v. Williams, 122 F. Supp. 2d 782 (E.D. Mich. 2000).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(f)(6)(ii) — 1 case
United States v. Williams, 122 F. Supp. 2d 782 (E.D. Mich. 2000).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.224(l)(d) — 2 cases
People v. Edgett, 560 N.W.2d 360 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997).
People v. Beasley, 497 N.W.2d 200 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
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.