Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 763 / Act 175 of 1927
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 763.9 (2026)

Failure to record or preserve recorded statement.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE


Act 175 of 1927


763.9 Failure to record or preserve recorded statement.

Sec. 9.

    Any failure to record a statement as required under section 8 of this chapter or to preserve a recorded statement does not prevent any law enforcement official present during the taking of the statement from testifying in court as to the circumstances and content of the individual's statement if the court determines that the statement is otherwise admissible. However, unless the individual objected to having the interrogation recorded and that objection was properly documented under section 8(3), the jury shall be instructed that it is the law of this state to record statements of an individual in custodial detention who is under interrogation for a major felony and that the jury may consider the absence of a recording in evaluating the evidence relating to the individual's statement.

History: Add. 2012, Act 479, Eff. Mar. 28, 2013

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2015–2024 · leading case: Zintman 482121 v. Horton (W.D. Mich. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Zintman 482121 v. Horton (W.D. Mich. 2020). · cites it 10× “8 , which requires the audiovisual recording of custodial interrogations, and Mich. Comp. Laws § 763.9 , which provides a penalty for not recording such interrogations—that the jury be instructed that it may consider the absence of a recording in evaluating the evidence about an…”
People of Michigan v. Justin Milton Bell (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 9× “JURY INSTRUCTION PURSUANT TO MCL 763.9 Defendant first argues that trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to ask the trial court to instruct the jury that interrogations for major felonies must be recorded, MCL 763.”
People of Michigan v. Justin Milton Bell (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 9× “JURY INSTRUCTION PURSUANT TO MCL 763.9 Defendant first argues that trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to ask the trial court to instruct the jury that interrogations for major felonies must be recorded, MCL 763.”
People of Michigan v. Justin Milton Bell (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 8× “8, and that jurors could consider the absence of such recording when evaluating the evidence in this case, MCL 763.9. Although we agree with defendant that he was entitled to the jury instruction and that trial counsel’s failure to request the instruction constituted performance…”
People of Michigan v. Justin Milton Bell (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 8× “8, and that jurors could consider the absence of such recording when evaluating the evidence in this case, MCL 763.9. Although we agree with defendant that he was entitled to the jury instruction and that trial counsel’s failure to request the instruction constituted performance…”
People of Michigan v. Jawon Derell Turner (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 8× “The bare statement by Detective Gilbert, who was not present at the scene, that defendant had indicated in some manner that he did not wish to speak with the arresting officers, is insufficient to establish that defendant invoked his rights under Miranda. 4 Because of this, the…”
People of Michigan v. Kennie Carnail Whitby (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6× “” MCL 763.9. Trooper Hayes testified at the suppression hearing that although he thought his custodial interrogation of defendant was being recorded, he was informed that “the very first couple of minutes” of the interview were not recorded; these included Hayes’s notifying…”
People of Michigan v. Kennie Carnail Whitby (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6× “” MCL 763.9. Trooper Hayes testified at the suppression hearing that although he thought his custodial interrogation of defendant was being recorded, he was informed that “the very first couple of minutes” of the interview were not recorded; these included Hayes’s notifying…”
People of Michigan v. Michael Anthony McCroy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 5× “8 and MCL 763.9 address the requirements surrounding a law enforcement agency’s obligation to record interrogations of individuals using audiovisual recording equipment and the consequences for failing to do so.”
People of Michigan v. Michael Anthony McCroy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 5× “8 and MCL 763.9 address the requirements surrounding a law enforcement agency’s obligation to record interrogations of individuals using audiovisual recording equipment and the consequences for failing to do so.”
People of Michigan v. Keith Irving Luesing (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 5× “JURY INSTRUCTION PURSUANT TO MCL 763.9 To the extent that defendant also argues that he was entitled, pursuant to MCL 763.”
People of Michigan v. Keith Irving Luesing (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 5× “JURY INSTRUCTION PURSUANT TO MCL 763.9 To the extent that defendant also argues that he was entitled, pursuant to MCL 763.”
Show all 37 citing 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.