THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE
Act 328 of 1931
750.539d Installation, placement, or use of device for observing, recording, transmitting, photographing or eavesdropping in private place.
Sec. 539d.
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not do either of the following:
(a) Install, place, or use in any private place, without the consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy in that place, any device for observing, recording, transmitting, photographing, or eavesdropping upon the sounds or events in that place.
(b) Distribute, disseminate, or transmit for access by any other person a recording, photograph, or visual image the person knows or has reason to know was obtained in violation of this section.
(2) This section does not prohibit security monitoring in a residence if conducted by or at the direction of the owner or principal occupant of that residence unless conducted for a lewd or lascivious purpose.
(3) A person who violates or attempts to violate this section is guilty of a crime as follows:
(a) For a violation or attempted violation of subsection (1)(a):
(i) Except as provided in subparagraph (ii), the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both.
(ii) If the person was previously convicted of violating or attempting to violate this section, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.
(b) For a violation or attempted violation of subsection (1)(b), the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.
(4) This section does not prohibit a person from being charged with, convicted of, or punished for any other violation of law committed by that person while violating or attempting to violate subsection (1)(a) or (b).
History: Add. 1966, Act 319, Eff. Mar. 10, 1967 ;-- Am. 2004, Act 156, Eff. Sept. 1, 2004
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
23
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case:
Lewis v. LeGrow, 670 N.W.2d 675 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
Lewis v. LeGrow, 670 N.W.2d 675 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 6× “The trial court entered final judgments for plaintiffs, adding taxable costs and interest, and adjusting the awards of future damage by five percent to reflect present value.”
People v. Wilkens, 705 N.W.2d 728 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “145c(2); and one count of eavesdropping through installation of a camera, MCL 750.539d. [1] The trial court sentenced defendant as a third-offense habitual offender to 35 years and 5 months to 60 years' imprisonment for the CSC-I convictions, 20 to 40 years' imprisonment for…”
People v. Hill, 786 N.W.2d 601 (Mich. 2010).
· cites it 2× “797(3)(f), and three counts of installing a device for observing, photographing, or eavesdropping in a private place, MCL 750.539d. These convictions are not before us.”
People v. Waltonen, 728 N.W.2d 881 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
“7405(l)(d); one count of eavesdropping, MCL 750.539d; and four counts of engaging the services of a prostitute.”
People v. Kalchik, 407 N.W.2d 627 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “See also People v Abate, 105 Mich App 274 ; 306 NW2d 476 (1981), in which, under circumstances analogous to those presented here, the Court found a toilet stall in a public rest room at a roller skating rink to be a "private place" under MCL 750.539d; MSA 28.807(4). As noted by…”
Harkey v. Abate, 346 N.W.2d 74 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “MCL 750.539d; MSA 28.807(4). Though this statute does not specifically impose civil liability for such conduct, nor does plaintiff's complaint assert liability based on its violation, it does constitute, at a minimum, a legislative expression of public policy opposed to such…”
Detroit Edison Co. v. Stenman, 875 N.W.2d 767 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“In addition, defendants challenge whether the doctrine of collateral estoppel applies in this case, whether defendants’ pleadings should be considered as admissible evidence in support of their health-related claims because they filed the pleadings in propriis personis, whether…”
People v. Hill, 715 N.W.2d 301 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006).
“BASIC FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Defendant was charged with multiple counts of installation of a device for observing, photographing, or eavesdropping in a private place, MCL 750.539d; multiple counts of arranging for, producing, making, or financing child sexually abusive…”
People v. Abate, 306 N.W.2d 476 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 2× “Defendant-appellant, Michael Dante Abate, appeals by leave granted a decision of the trial court denying his motion to quash an information charging him with a violation of MCL 750.539d; MSA 28.807(4). The statute prohibits the installation or maintenance of devices designed for…”
People v. Dezek, 308 N.W.2d 652 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981).
“See also People v Abate, 105 Mich App 274 ; 306 NW2d 476 (1981), in which, under circumstances analogous to those presented here, the Court found a toilet stall in a public rest room at a roller skating rink to be a "private place” under MCL 750.539d; MSA 28.807(4). Compare also…”
Lewis v. Dayton-Hudson Corp., 339 N.W.2d 857 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983).
“For example, in People v Abate, 105 Mich App 274, 278 ; 306 NW2d 476 (1981), in a criminal prosecution brought pursuant to MCL 750.539d; MSA 28.807(4), the Court held that defendant’s installation of a two-way mirror over the women’s restroom of his roller skating rink…”
People v. Livingston, 236 N.W.2d 63 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975).
“” MCLA 750.539d; MSA 28.807(4). "Any person who uses or divulges any information which he knows or reasonably should know was obtained in violation of sections 539b, 539c or 539d is guilty of a felony * * * .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539d(1) — 3 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539d(1)(a) — 6 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539d(2) — 1 case
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539d(3) — 2 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539d(3)(a)(i) — 2 cases
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.