THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Act 175 of 1927
767A.2 Investigative subpoenas; petition for authorization; contents; filing; application for immunity; confidentiality of application; exemption from disclosure.
Sec. 2.
(1) A prosecuting attorney may petition the district court, the circuit court, or the recorder's court in writing for authorization to issue 1 or more subpoenas to investigate the commission of a felony as provided in this chapter.
(2) A petition for authorization to issue 1 or more investigative subpoenas under subsection (1) shall contain all of the following:
(a) A brief description of each felony being investigated.
(b) The name of each person who will be questioned or who will be required to produce material described under subdivision (c).
(c) A general description of any records, documents, or physical evidence to be examined.
(d) A brief statement of the facts establishing the basis for the prosecuting attorney's belief that the testimony of the person or examination of the records, documents, or physical evidence is relevant to the investigation of a felony described in the petition.
(3) The petition for authorization to issue 1 or more investigative subpoenas may be filed by the prosecuting attorney with any of the following:
(a) The circuit court of the judicial circuit in which the felony or a portion of the felony is alleged to have been committed or of any judicial circuit in which the prosecuting attorney lawfully maintains an office.
(b) The recorder's court if the felony or a portion of the felony is alleged to have been committed in the city of Detroit or if the prosecuting attorney lawfully maintains an office in the city of Detroit.
(c) The district court of the judicial district in which the felony or a portion of the felony is alleged to have been committed or of any judicial district in which the prosecuting attorney lawfully maintains an office.
(4) A prosecuting attorney may file an application for immunity under section 7 at the time he or she files a petition for authorization to issue 1 or more investigative subpoenas under this section.
(5) An application under this section is confidential and shall not be available for public inspection or copying or divulged to any person except as otherwise provided in this chapter. An application under this section is exempt for disclosure under the freedom of information act, Act No. 422 of the Public Acts of 1976, being sections 15.231 to 15.246 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
History: Add. 1995, Act 148, Eff. Oct. 1, 1995
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
15
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case:
People v. Farquharson, 731 N.W.2d 797 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
People v. Farquharson, 731 N.W.2d 797 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “MCL 767A.2 allows a prosecuting attorney to petition the district court, the circuit court, or the recorder's court in writing for authorization to issue 1 or more subpoenas to investigate the commission of a felony.”
Truel v. City of Dearborn, 804 N.W.2d 744 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 4× “The petition must identify “each person who will be questioned or who will be required to produce material” and the “records, documents, or physical evidence to be examined,” and explain why “the testimony of the person or examination of the records, documents, or physical…”
Flagg v. City of Detroit, 268 F.R.D. 279 (E.D. Mich. 2010).
· cites it 2× “(See Michigan State Police 11/6/2009 Memorandum of Law at 4-8 (citing Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 767A.2(5), 767A.8).) The Court, in turn, relied in part on this state-law privilege in ordering that the forthcoming depositions of two Michigan State Police troopers be conducted under…”
People v. Gadomski, 731 N.W.2d 466 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 3× “In regard to whether the evidence obtained through the subpoenas should be suppressed, the circuit court further held: This Court believes it is clear that the legislative intent in adopting [MCL 767A.2], as in the Federal Right to Privacy Act, is to preclude the government from…”
In re Request for Investigative Subpoena, 256 Mich. App. 39 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 3× “As part of the ongoing investigation into Bemita White’s murder, the Ingham County Prosecutor sought an investigative subpoena pursuant to MCL 767A.2(1) for the files of *41 Rettstadt.”
People v. Pruitt, 580 N.W.2d 462 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).
“MCL 767A.2(1); MSA 28.1023A(2)(1). Once an investigative subpoena is issued and properly served, the person subpoenaed “shall appear before the prosecuting attorney and answer questions concerning the felony being investigated or produce any records, documents, or physical…”
In Re Investigation of Death of White, 662 N.W.2d 69 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 3× “§ 767A.2(1) for the files of Rettstadt. The trial court authorized the investigative subpoena that provided Rettstadt was to produce documents pertaining to the retention of the agency by Artis White, including but not limited to, all contracts and/or retention agreements; all…”
In Re Investigative Subpoenas, 779 N.W.2d 277 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).
“Approximately a year later, the prosecutor filed a petition in the circuit court seeking authorization to issue investigative subpoenas pursuant to MCL 767A.2(1), which states, “A prosecuting attorney may *204 petition the district court, the circuit court, or the recorder’s…”
People of Michigan v. Malcolm Xavier Jeffries (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 4× ““A judge may authorize” -2- the prosecutor to issue a subpoena if the prosecutor properly petitions the court in compliance with MCL 767A.2, if “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe a felony has been committed,” and if “the judge determines there is…”
People of Michigan v. Malcolm Xavier Jeffries (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 4× ““A judge may authorize” -2- the prosecutor to issue a subpoena if the prosecutor properly petitions the court in compliance with MCL 767A.2, if “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe a felony has been committed,” and if “the judge determines there is…”
People of Michigan v. William Gale Melendez (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× ““A judge may authorize” the prosecutor to issue a subpoena if the prosecutor properly petitions the court under MCL 767A.2, “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe a felony has been committed,” and “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe…”
People of Michigan v. William Gale Melendez (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× ““A judge may authorize” the prosecutor to issue a subpoena if the prosecutor properly petitions the court under MCL 767A.2, “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe a felony has been committed,” and “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767A.2(1) — 12 cases
People v. Farquharson, 731 N.W.2d 797 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
“MCL 767A.2 allows a prosecuting attorney to petition the district court, the circuit court, or the recorder's court in writing for authorization to issue 1 or more subpoenas to investigate the commission of a felony.”
Truel v. City of Dearborn, 804 N.W.2d 744 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“The petition must identify “each person who will be questioned or who will be required to produce material” and the “records, documents, or physical evidence to be examined,” and explain why “the testimony of the person or examination of the records, documents, or physical…”
People v. Pruitt, 580 N.W.2d 462 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).
“MCL 767A.2(1); MSA 28.1023A(2)(1). Once an investigative subpoena is issued and properly served, the person subpoenaed “shall appear before the prosecuting attorney and answer questions concerning the felony being investigated or produce any records, documents, or physical…”
In re Request for Investigative Subpoena, 256 Mich. App. 39 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
“As part of the ongoing investigation into Bemita White’s murder, the Ingham County Prosecutor sought an investigative subpoena pursuant to MCL 767A.2(1) for the files of *41 Rettstadt.”
In Re Investigation of Death of White, 662 N.W.2d 69 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
“§ 767A.2(1) for the files of Rettstadt. The trial court authorized the investigative subpoena that provided Rettstadt was to produce documents pertaining to the retention of the agency by Artis White, including but not limited to, all contracts and/or retention agreements; all…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767A.2(2) — 3 cases
Truel v. City of Dearborn, 804 N.W.2d 744 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“The petition must identify “each person who will be questioned or who will be required to produce material” and the “records, documents, or physical evidence to be examined,” and explain why “the testimony of the person or examination of the records, documents, or physical…”
People of Michigan v. Malcolm Xavier Jeffries (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
““A judge may authorize” -2- the prosecutor to issue a subpoena if the prosecutor properly petitions the court in compliance with MCL 767A.2, if “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe a felony has been committed,” and if “the judge determines there is…”
People of Michigan v. Malcolm Xavier Jeffries (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
““A judge may authorize” -2- the prosecutor to issue a subpoena if the prosecutor properly petitions the court in compliance with MCL 767A.2, if “the judge determines there is reasonable cause to believe a felony has been committed,” and if “the judge determines there is…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767A.2(2)(b) — 1 case
Truel v. City of Dearborn, 804 N.W.2d 744 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“The petition must identify “each person who will be questioned or who will be required to produce material” and the “records, documents, or physical evidence to be examined,” and explain why “the testimony of the person or examination of the records, documents, or physical…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767A.2(2)(d) — 2 cases
In re Request for Investigative Subpoena, 256 Mich. App. 39 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
“As part of the ongoing investigation into Bemita White’s murder, the Ingham County Prosecutor sought an investigative subpoena pursuant to MCL 767A.2(1) for the files of *41 Rettstadt.”
In Re Investigation of Death of White, 662 N.W.2d 69 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
“§ 767A.2(1) for the files of Rettstadt. The trial court authorized the investigative subpoena that provided Rettstadt was to produce documents pertaining to the retention of the agency by Artis White, including but not limited to, all contracts and/or retention agreements; all…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767A.2(5) — 3 cases
Flagg v. City of Detroit, 268 F.R.D. 279 (E.D. Mich. 2010).
“(See Michigan State Police 11/6/2009 Memorandum of Law at 4-8 (citing Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 767A.2(5), 767A.8).) The Court, in turn, relied in part on this state-law privilege in ordering that the forthcoming depositions of two Michigan State Police troopers be conducted under…”
Truel v. City of Dearborn, 804 N.W.2d 744 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“The petition must identify “each person who will be questioned or who will be required to produce material” and the “records, documents, or physical evidence to be examined,” and explain why “the testimony of the person or examination of the records, documents, or physical…”
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.