Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 767 / Act 175 of 1927
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 767.91 (2026)

Out of state witnesses; attendance; definitions.

✓ 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


767.91 Out of state witnesses; attendance; definitions.

Sec. 91.

    As used in sections 91 to 95 of this chapter:

    (a) "Witness" includes a person whose testimony is desired in any proceeding or investigation by a grand jury or in a criminal action, prosecution or proceeding.

    (b) "State" includes any territory of the United States and the District of Columbia.

    (c) "Summons" includes a subpoena, order or other notice requiring the appearance of a witness.

History: Add. 1970, Act 232, Imd. Eff. Dec. 3, 1970

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2023 · leading case: People v. Dye, 427 N.W.2d 501 (Mich. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Dye, 427 N.W.2d 501 (Mich. 1988). · cites it 10× “The prosecutor waited until seventeen days before the trial to attempt to locate the witnesses using the uniform act to secure the attendance of witnesses from without a state in criminal proceedings, MCL 767.91 et seq.; MSA 28.1023(191) et *86 seq.”
People v. Bean, 580 N.W.2d 390 (Mich. 1998). · cites it 2× “§ 767.91 et seq.; M.S.A. § 28.1023(191) et seq.”
People v. Freeland, 300 N.W.2d 616 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “In the present case, defendant argues that the finding of due diligence was precluded by the prosecutor's failure to utilize the statutory procedures for securing the presence of out-of-state witnesses, MCL 767.91 et seq.; MSA 28.1023(191) et seq.”
People v. McFall, 569 N.W.2d 828 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). “1023(191) et seq 1 Under the Uniform Act, a judge may, in certain circumstances, certify that a proposed witness is material to a criminal proceeding: If a person in a state, which by law provides for commanding persons within its borders to attend and testify in criminal…”
Ellis v. Kaye-Kibbey, 581 F. Supp. 2d 861 (W.D. Mich. 2008). “§ 767.91 et seq., a Michigan court may issue a certificate stating the facts and anticipated number of days of litigation, and may also recommend that the witness be taken into custody [by the authorities in the other State] and delivered to the Michigan court.”
People v. Williams, 318 N.W.2d 671 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “V Defendant also alleges that the trial court erred when it refused to compel the attendance of two witnesses, who were in jurisdictions other than Michigan, under the uniform act to secure the attendance of witnesses from without a state in criminal proceedings, MCL 767.91 et…”
People v. Anglin, 314 N.W.2d 581 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “1 MCL 767.91 et seq.; MSA 28.1023(191) et seq.”
People v. Mitchell, 210 N.W.2d 509 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 2× “In the case at bar, the prosecution made no effort to produce McGuire, consistent with its belief that no duty existed. Thus, there are no efforts to test against the due diligence standard.”
People v. Thorin, 336 N.W.2d 913 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). “The uniform act to secure the attendance of witnesses in MCL 767.91 et seq.; MSA 28.1023(191) et seq.”
People v. McIntosh, 191 N.W.2d 749 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 2× “1021); repealed by PA 1970, No 232, which enacted substitute provisions in conformity with the uniform act which can be found in MCLA 1971 Cum Supp § 767.91 et seq. (Stat Ann 1971 Cum Supp § 28.”
People v. McIntosh, 204 N.W.2d 135 (Mich. 1973). “[1] MCLA 767.91 et seq.; MSA 28.1023(191) et seq.”
People v. Gaffney, 215 N.W.2d 587 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974). “MCLA 767.91 et seq.; MSA 28.1023(191) et seq.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767.91(a) — 1 case
People v. Dye, 427 N.W.2d 501 (Mich. 1988). “The prosecutor waited until seventeen days before the trial to attempt to locate the witnesses using the uniform act to secure the attendance of witnesses from without a state in criminal proceedings, MCL 767.91 et seq.; MSA 28.1023(191) et *86 seq.”
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.