Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 752.862 (2026)

Careless, reckless or negligent use of firearms; injury of property; penalty.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

CARELESS, RECKLESS, OR NEGLIGENT USE OF FIREARMS

Act 45 of 1952

752.862 Careless, reckless or negligent use of firearms; injury of property; penalty.

Sec. 2.

Any person who, because of carelessness, recklessness or negligence, but not wilfully or wantonly, shall cause or allow any firearm under his control to be discharged so as to destroy or injure the property of another, real or personal, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 90 days or by a fine of not more than $100.00, if the injury to such property shall not exceed the sum of $50.00, but in the event that such injury shall exceed the sum of $50.00, then said offense shall be punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year or by a fine not exceeding $500.00.

History: 1952, Act 45, Eff. Sept. 18, 1952

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1996–2018 · leading case: People v. Switras, 550 N.W.2d 842 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

People v. Switras, 550 N.W.2d 842 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3× “Following a district court jury trial, defendant was convicted of careless discharge of a firearm resulting in property damage, MCL 752.862; MSA 28.436(22). Defendant was ordered to pay a fine and to forfeit the firearm used during the commission of the crime, pursuant to MCL…”

People of Michigan v. David Clarence Bryan (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “227b, and one count of careless discharge of a firearm resulting in property damage of $50 or less, MCL 752.862. In the trial court, defendant filed a motion seeking dismissal of the marijuana-related offenses under MCL 333.”

People of Michigan v. Donald Joseph Brewczynski Sr (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “In Switras, this Court concluded that a defendant who was convicted of “careless discharge of a firearm resulting in property damage, MCL 752.862” could not have the weapon forfeited under 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.