THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Act 175 of 1927
771.5 Termination of probation period; report; discharge of probationer from supervision; suspension of sentence; extension of probation; section inapplicable to certain juveniles.
Sec. 5.
(1) When the probation period terminates, the probation officer shall report that fact and the probationer's conduct during the probation period to the court. Upon receiving the report, the court may discharge the probationer from further supervision and enter a judgment of suspended sentence or extend the probation period as the circumstances require, so long as the maximum probation period is not exceeded.
(2) This section does not apply to a juvenile placed on probation and committed under section 1(3) or (4) of chapter IX to an institution or agency described in the youth rehabilitation services act, 1974 PA 150, MCL 803.301 to 803.309.
History: 1927, Act 175, Eff. Sept. 5, 1927 ;-- CL 1929, 17375 ;-- CL 1948, 771.5 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 78, Eff. Oct. 1, 1988 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 520, Imd. Eff. Jan. 12, 1999
Compiler's Notes:
Section 3 of Act 78 of 1988 provides: “This amendatory act shall take effect June 1, 1988.” This section was amended by Act 181 of 1988 to read as follows: “This amendatory act shall take effect October 1, 1988.”
FormerLaw Notes:
See section 5 of Act 105 of 1913, being CL 1915, § 2033.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case:
People v. Glass, 794 N.W.2d 49 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
People v. Glass, 794 N.W.2d 49 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“For example, MCL 771.5(1) reads: When the probation period terminates, the probation officer shall report that fact and the probationer’s conduct during the probation period to the court.”
People v. Valentin, 559 N.W.2d 396 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “§ 771.5(2); M.S.A. § 28.1135(2). Whether the differences in treatment produces results that we find anomalous, the number of provisions that create the distinctions indicates that different treatment afforded to juveniles sentenced within the juvenile offender system was…”
People of Michigan v. John David Vanderpool (Mich. 2020).
· cites it 37× “Without further discussion of either section, and without any discussion of the then-existing version of MCL 771.5, which set forth the same requirements as the current version, Marks held that a defendant is not denied due process when restitution is imposed as a condition of…”
United States v. Michael Ferguson (6th Cir. 2018).
“” Mich. Comp. Laws § 771.5 (1). The court may even extend the probationary period ex parte without giving the probationer notice or an opportunity to be heard.”
People of Michigan v. Jamie Jean Zambon (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
“Under MCL 771.5(1): When the probation period terminates, the probation officer shall report that fact and the probationer’s conduct during the probation period to the court.”
20240215_C366252_28_366252.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“2 through MCL 771.5. B. MCL 769.1k(1)(b)(iii) The trial court’s order of probation required defendant to pay certain court costs.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 771.5(1) — 3 cases
People v. Glass, 794 N.W.2d 49 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“For example, MCL 771.5(1) reads: When the probation period terminates, the probation officer shall report that fact and the probationer’s conduct during the probation period to the court.”
People of Michigan v. John David Vanderpool (Mich. 2020).
“Without further discussion of either section, and without any discussion of the then-existing version of MCL 771.5, which set forth the same requirements as the current version, Marks held that a defendant is not denied due process when restitution is imposed as a condition of…”
People of Michigan v. Jamie Jean Zambon (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
“Under MCL 771.5(1): When the probation period terminates, the probation officer shall report that fact and the probationer’s conduct during the probation period to the court.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 771.5(2) — 1 case
People v. Valentin, 559 N.W.2d 396 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997).
“§ 771.5(2); M.S.A. § 28.1135(2). Whether the differences in treatment produces results that we find anomalous, the number of provisions that create the distinctions indicates that different treatment afforded to juveniles sentenced within the juvenile offender system was…”
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.