Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.422 (2026)
Perjury committed in courts.
✓ 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
750.422 Perjury committed in courts.
Sec. 422.
Perjury committed in courts—Any person who, being lawfully required to depose the truth in any proceeding in a court of justice, shall commit perjury shall be guilty of a felony, punishable, if such perjury was committed on the trial of an indictment for a capital crime, by imprisonment in the state prison for life, or any term of years, and if committed in any other case, by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 15 years.
History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.422
FormerLaw Notes:
See section 1 of Ch. 156 of R.S. 1846, being CL 1857, § 5820; CL 1871, § 7653; How., § 9235; CL 1897, § 11305; CL 1915, § 14972; and CL 1929, § 16563.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 57
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1965–2026 · leading case: People v. Lively, 680 N.W.2d 878 (Mich. 2004).
People v. Lively, 680 N.W.2d 878 (Mich. 2004). “We granted leave to appeal [1] to consider whether the materiality of a false statement is an element of the statutory offense of perjury, MCL 750.422 and 750.423. The Court of Appeals held that materiality is an element that must be submitted to the jury, [2] but the plain…”
People v. McIntire, 591 N.W.2d 231 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). “§ 750.422; MSA 28.664, and resulting concurrent sentences of ten to fifteen years' imprisonment.”
People v. White, 308 N.W.2d 128 (Mich. 1981). “287; MCL 750.422; MSA 28.664. On appeal, the Court of Appeals in an unpublished opinion affirmed the defendant's conviction *377 of attempted delivery of heroin and reversed his perjury conviction, relying on People v Longuemire, 87 Mich App 395 ; 275 NW2d 12 (1978).”
People v. Underwood, 750 N.W.2d 612 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “The prosecution appeals by leave granted the sentence imposed following defendant’s plea-based conviction of perjury committed in a court proceeding, MCL 750.422. Defendant was sentenced as second-offense a habitual offender, MCL 769.”
People v. Waterstone, 296 Mich. App. 121 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). “http://jtc.courts.mi.gov (emphasis added). MCL 750.”
People v. McGee, 672 N.W.2d 191 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “McGee appeals by right her conviction for perjury during a court proceeding, MCL 750.422. She argues that the trial court *685 denied her due process of law and her statutory right to a preliminary examination by granting the prosecutor’s motion to add the perjury charge as an…”
People v. Cash, 200 N.W.2d 83 (Mich. 1972). “CASH, on or about the seventh day of May, 1965, did tell one Thomas Bowles, in the presence of one Aaron Butler, that there was some money set aside for him by the numbers men, said statement being made at the William Beaumont Hospital located in the City of Royal Oak, Oakland…”
People v. Garth, 287 N.W.2d 216 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). “696, through perjury in a court of law, MCL 750.422; MSA 28.664, to felony murder, MCL 750.”
People v. Ramos, 424 N.W.2d 509 (Mich. 1988). “The higher offense, described in MCL 750.422; MSA 28.664, is the modern successor of the common-law crime of perjury.”
People v. McIntire, 599 N.W.2d 102 (Mich. 1999). “See MCL 750.422; MSA 28.664. 6 Considering the fact that, in many cases (such as this one), the punishment for the underlying crime that is the subject of the grand jury testimony will be far greater than that for perjury, [we] find it particularly troubling to infer without…”
People v. Adams, 425 N.W.2d 437 (Mich. 1988). “[7] Prosecution under the perjury statute, MCL 750.422; MSA 28.644, is the appropriate course when the circumstances indicate that punishment is warranted.”
People v. Honeyman, 546 N.W.2d 719 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996). “Defendant appeals as of right his jury trial conviction of one count of perjury, MCL 750.422; MSA 28.664. He was sentenced to five to fifteen years’ imprisonment.”
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.