Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 777 / Act 175 of 1927
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38 (2026)

Victim asportation or captivity.

✓ 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


777.38 Victim asportation or captivity.

Sec. 38.

    (1) Offense variable 8 is victim asportation or captivity. Score offense variable 8 by determining which of the following apply and by assigning the number of points attributable to the one that has the highest number of points:

    

    (a) A victim was asported to another place of greater danger or to a situation of greater danger or was held captive beyond the time necessary to commit the offense

    15 points

    (b) No victim was asported or held captive

    0 points

    (2) All of the following apply to scoring offense variable 8:

    (a) Count each person who was placed in danger of injury or loss of life as a victim.

    (b) Score 0 points if the sentencing offense is kidnapping.

    

History: Add. 1998, Act 317, Eff. Dec. 15, 1998

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 189 cases (44 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: People v. Hardy; People v. Glenn, 494 Mich. 430 (Mich. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Hardy; People v. Glenn, 494 Mich. 430 (Mich. 2013). · cites it 6× “35; OV 8, MCL 777.38; and OV 14, MCL 777.44. In my view, these aspects of the sentencing guidelines bolster the conclusion that the majority errs in this case.”
People v. Kosik, 841 N.W.2d 906 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 8× “However, the Legislature did not amend MCL 777.38. Thus, the question is whether “kidnapping” as used in MCL 777.”
People v. Spanke, 658 N.W.2d 504 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “Examining the record in light of the definition we ascribe to the term “asportation,” we find that the *648 trial court did not abuse its discretion in its scoring of ov 8.”
People v. Cox, 709 N.W.2d 152 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “" MCL 777.38(1)(a). The victim testified that the sex acts occurred at defendant's house, and the investigating police officer testified that defendant admitted that the sex acts occurred at his house.”
People v. McGraw, 771 N.W.2d 655 (Mich. 2009). · cites it 2× “" MCL 777.38(1)(a). That the Legislature has explicitly stated that conduct not related to the offense being scored can be considered when scoring some offense variables strengthens our conclusion that, unless stated otherwise, only conduct that relates to the offense being…”
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). · cites it 2× “37(1)(a); OV 8 (asportation of victim) (15 points), MCL 777.38(1)(a); OV 9 (number of victims) (100 points), MCL 777.”
People v. Morson, 685 N.W.2d 203 (Mich. 2004). · cites it 2× “" MCL 777.38. That the Legislature has explicitly stated in some offense variables that conduct not related to the offense being scored can be considered strengthens the conclusion that, unless stated otherwise, only conduct that relates to the offense being scored may be…”
People v. Smith, 793 N.W.2d 666 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 2× “46(2)(a) permits a court to add the “aggregate value of the property involved” when scoring OV 16, and MCL 777.38(1)(a) focuses on conduct “beyond the time necessary to commit the offense” when scoring OV 8.”
People v. Laidler, 817 N.W.2d 517 (Mich. 2012). · cites it 2× “37(2) (OV 7, aggravated physical abuse); MCL 777.38(2)(a) (OV 8, victim asportation or captivity).”
People v. Apgar, 690 N.W.2d 312 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “§ 777.38(1)(a). Although the jury found that there was no use of force, the victim was transported from her friend's house in Dearborn to an unfamiliar house in Hamtramck, where she was involved in sexual encounters with three men she barely knew.”
People v. Bosca, 871 N.W.2d 307 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “Defendant also objected to the scoring of 15 points for OV 8, MCL 777.38(l)(a), which provides for a score of 15 points when “[a] victim was asported to another place of greater danger or to a situation of greater danger or was held captive beyond the time necessary to commit…”
People v. Chelmicki, 850 N.W.2d 612 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “” MCL 777.38(l)(a). See also People v Apgar, 264 Mich App 321, 329-330 ; 690 NW2d 312 (2004).”
Show all 189 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(1) — 34 cases
People v. Spanke, 658 N.W.2d 504 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “Examining the record in light of the definition we ascribe to the term “asportation,” we find that the *648 trial court did not abuse its discretion in its scoring of ov 8.”
People of Michigan v. Robert Joseph Mattson (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Robert Joseph Mattson (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
People of Michigan v. Jeffrey Ricardo Wimberly (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
People of Michigan v. Smokey Dee Crutcher-Bey (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(1)(1) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Matthew Allen Riselay (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(1)(a) — 146 cases
People v. Smith, 754 N.W.2d 284 (Mich. 2008). “37(1)(a); OV 8 (asportation of victim) (15 points), MCL 777.38(1)(a); OV 9 (number of victims) (100 points), MCL 777.”
People v. Cox, 709 N.W.2d 152 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “" MCL 777.38(1)(a). The victim testified that the sex acts occurred at defendant's house, and the investigating police officer testified that defendant admitted that the sex acts occurred at his house.”
People v. McGraw, 771 N.W.2d 655 (Mich. 2009). “" MCL 777.38(1)(a). That the Legislature has explicitly stated that conduct not related to the offense being scored can be considered when scoring some offense variables strengthens our conclusion that, unless stated otherwise, only conduct that relates to the offense being…”
People v. Smith, 793 N.W.2d 666 (Mich. 2010). “46(2)(a) permits a court to add the “aggregate value of the property involved” when scoring OV 16, and MCL 777.38(1)(a) focuses on conduct “beyond the time necessary to commit the offense” when scoring OV 8.”
People v. Spanke, 658 N.W.2d 504 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “Examining the record in light of the definition we ascribe to the term “asportation,” we find that the *648 trial court did not abuse its discretion in its scoring of ov 8.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(1)(b) — 12 cases
People of Michigan v. Clarence Jovan Davison (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
People of Michigan v. Matthew Joshua Keller (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Ray Daniel Roland (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Leon Allen Lines (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
People of Michigan v. Leon Allen Lines (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(1)(c) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Douglas James Crystal Jr (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(2) — 1 case
People v. Kosik, 841 N.W.2d 906 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “However, the Legislature did not amend MCL 777.38. Thus, the question is whether “kidnapping” as used in MCL 777.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(2)(a) — 5 cases
People v. Laidler, 817 N.W.2d 517 (Mich. 2012). “37(2) (OV 7, aggravated physical abuse); MCL 777.38(2)(a) (OV 8, victim asportation or captivity).”
People of Michigan v. Markus Kentay Vary (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
People of Michigan v. Ruben Joseph Rodriguez (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
People of Michigan v. Matthew Allen Riselay (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
People of Michigan v. Damaceno Richard Abrego (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(2)(b) — 11 cases
People v. Hardy; People v. Glenn, 494 Mich. 430 (Mich. 2013). “35; OV 8, MCL 777.38; and OV 14, MCL 777.44. In my view, these aspects of the sentencing guidelines bolster the conclusion that the majority errs in this case.”
People v. Kosik, 841 N.W.2d 906 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “However, the Legislature did not amend MCL 777.38. Thus, the question is whether “kidnapping” as used in MCL 777.”
People v. Hunt, 810 N.W.2d 588 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
People v. Underwood, 750 N.W.2d 612 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
People v. Mutchie, 650 N.W.2d 733 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 777.38(l)(a) — 12 cases
People v. Spanke, 658 N.W.2d 504 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “Examining the record in light of the definition we ascribe to the term “asportation,” we find that the *648 trial court did not abuse its discretion in its scoring of ov 8.”
People v. Cox, 709 N.W.2d 152 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “" MCL 777.38(1)(a). The victim testified that the sex acts occurred at defendant's house, and the investigating police officer testified that defendant admitted that the sex acts occurred at his house.”
People v. McGraw, 771 N.W.2d 655 (Mich. 2009). “" MCL 777.38(1)(a). That the Legislature has explicitly stated that conduct not related to the offense being scored can be considered when scoring some offense variables strengthens our conclusion that, unless stated otherwise, only conduct that relates to the offense being…”
People v. Bosca, 871 N.W.2d 307 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “Defendant also objected to the scoring of 15 points for OV 8, MCL 777.38(l)(a), which provides for a score of 15 points when “[a] victim was asported to another place of greater danger or to a situation of greater danger or was held captive beyond the time necessary to commit…”
People v. Chelmicki, 850 N.W.2d 612 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “” MCL 777.38(l)(a). See also People v Apgar, 264 Mich App 321, 329-330 ; 690 NW2d 312 (2004).”
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.