Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 780 / Act 177 of 1957
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.131 (2026)

Notice of untried warrant, indictment, information, or complaint; notice of place of imprisonment; request for final disposition; statement; delivery by certified mail; applicability of section.

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

DISPOSITION OF UNTRIED CHARGES AGAINST INMATES OF PENAL INSTITUTIONS


Act 177 of 1957


780.131 Notice of untried warrant, indictment, information, or complaint; notice of place of imprisonment; request for final disposition; statement; delivery by certified mail; applicability of section.

Sec. 1.

    (1) Whenever the department of corrections receives notice that there is pending in this state any untried warrant, indictment, information, or complaint setting forth against any inmate of a correctional facility of this state a criminal offense for which a prison sentence might be imposed upon conviction, the inmate shall be brought to trial within 180 days after the department of corrections causes to be delivered to the prosecuting attorney of the county in which the warrant, indictment, information, or complaint is pending written notice of the place of imprisonment of the inmate and a request for final disposition of the warrant, indictment, information, or complaint. The request shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth the term of commitment under which the prisoner is being held, the time already served, the time remaining to be served on the sentence, the amount of good time or disciplinary credits earned, the time of parole eligibility of the prisoner, and any decisions of the parole board relating to the prisoner. The written notice and statement shall be delivered by certified mail.

    (2) This section does not apply to a warrant, indictment, information, or complaint arising from either of the following:

    (a) A criminal offense committed by an inmate of a state correctional facility while incarcerated in the correctional facility.

    (b) A criminal offense committed by an inmate of a state correctional facility after the inmate has escaped from the correctional facility and before he or she has been returned to the custody of the department of corrections.

History: 1957, Act 177, Eff. Sept. 27, 1957 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 400, Eff. Mar. 30, 1989

Compiler's Notes:

    For transfer of powers and duties of Michigan parole and commutation board to Michigan parole board within department of corrections, and abolishment of Michigan parole and commutation board, see E.R.O. No. 2011-3, compiled at MCL 791.305.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 238 cases (39 in the last 5 years), 1959–2026 · leading case: People v. Lown, 794 N.W.2d 9 (Mich. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Lown, 794 N.W.2d 9 (Mich. 2011). · cites it 90× “This case requires us to clarify the correct interpretation of the statutory “180-day rule” established by MCL 780.131 and MCL 780.133. The object of this rule is to dispose of new criminal charges against inmates in Michigan correctional facilities; the rule requires dismissal…”
People v. Williams, 716 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 2006). · cites it 36× “The 180-day rule, codified in MCL 780.131, provides that a prison inmate who has a pending criminal charge must be tried within 180 days after the Department of Corrections delivers to the prosecutor notice of the inmate's imprisonment and requests disposition of the pending…”
People v. Smith, 475 N.W.2d 333 (Mich. 1991). · cites it 18× “I also concur in Justice LEVIN'S conclusion that People v Woodruff, 414 Mich 130 ; 323 NW2d 923 (1982), was incorrectly decided and that the statutory 180-day rule, MCL 780.131 et seq.; MSA 28.969(1) et seq.”
People v. McLaughlin, 672 N.W.2d 860 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “1 The police arrived while defendant was still banging on the door and arrested him.”
People v. Walker, 741 N.W.2d 843 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 10× “*539 The Michigan Supreme Court previously held that MCL 780.131 allowed the 180-day period to be exceeded as long as “apparent good-faith action is taken well within the period and the people proceed promptly and with dispatch thereafter toward readying the case for trial.”
People v. Rivera, 835 N.W.2d 464 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “MCL 780.131(1) provides: Whenever the department of corrections receives notice that there is pending in this state any untried warrant, indictment, information, or complaint setting forth against any inmate of a correctional facility of this state a criminal offense for which a…”
People v. Duenaz, 854 N.W.2d 531 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “to be delivered,” found in Michigan’s intrastate 180-day rule that is set forth in MCL 780.131 and MCR 6.004(D), regarding untried charges that are pending against Michigan prison inmates.”
People v. Connor, 531 N.W.2d 734 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 6× “A pretrial conference was held on November 30, 1992, and trial was scheduled for February 12, 1993. On the date scheduled for trial, the court granted defendant’s motion to quash the habitual offender information.”
Mccahan v. Brennan, 822 N.W.2d 747 (Mich. 2012). · cites it 2× “, dissenting), in which the dissenting justice argued that the Court should overrule a 1959 decision of this Court interpreting MCL 780.131 and MCL 780.133 without any mention or apparent regard of more than 50 years of legislative “acquiescence” in that decision.”
People v. Schinzel, 296 N.W.2d 85 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 8× “969(3), ruling that more than 180 days had elapsed from the time of the charge to the trial and that the people had not met the burden of establishing good faith action to comply with MCL 780.131; MSA 28.969(1). People v Schinzel, 86 Mich App 337 ; 272 NW2d 648 (1978) (J.”
People v. Jones, 579 N.W.2d 82 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “§ 780.131; M.S.A. § 28.969(1); MCR 6.004(D), had been violated and, in addition, to allow the circuit court to correct the judgment of sentence by vacating the sentence imposed for the offense underlying the habitual offender conviction.”
Jones v. Dep't of Corr., 664 N.W.2d 717 (Mich. 2003). · cites it 2× “" [13] The Legislature well knows how to provide remedies for statutory time limitation violations and has explicitly done so in other settings.”
Show all 238 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.131(1) — 63 cases
People v. Lown, 794 N.W.2d 9 (Mich. 2011). “This case requires us to clarify the correct interpretation of the statutory “180-day rule” established by MCL 780.131 and MCL 780.133. The object of this rule is to dispose of new criminal charges against inmates in Michigan correctional facilities; the rule requires dismissal…”
People v. Rivera, 835 N.W.2d 464 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “MCL 780.131(1) provides: Whenever the department of corrections receives notice that there is pending in this state any untried warrant, indictment, information, or complaint setting forth against any inmate of a correctional facility of this state a criminal offense for which a…”
People v. Williams, 716 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 2006). “The 180-day rule, codified in MCL 780.131, provides that a prison inmate who has a pending criminal charge must be tried within 180 days after the Department of Corrections delivers to the prosecutor notice of the inmate's imprisonment and requests disposition of the pending…”
People v. McLaughlin, 672 N.W.2d 860 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “1 The police arrived while defendant was still banging on the door and arrested him.”
People v. Walker, 741 N.W.2d 843 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “*539 The Michigan Supreme Court previously held that MCL 780.131 allowed the 180-day period to be exceeded as long as “apparent good-faith action is taken well within the period and the people proceed promptly and with dispatch thereafter toward readying the case for trial.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.131(2) — 8 cases
People v. Williams, 716 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 2006). “The 180-day rule, codified in MCL 780.131, provides that a prison inmate who has a pending criminal charge must be tried within 180 days after the Department of Corrections delivers to the prosecutor notice of the inmate's imprisonment and requests disposition of the pending…”
People v. Walker, 741 N.W.2d 843 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “*539 The Michigan Supreme Court previously held that MCL 780.131 allowed the 180-day period to be exceeded as long as “apparent good-faith action is taken well within the period and the people proceed promptly and with dispatch thereafter toward readying the case for trial.”
People v. Connor, 531 N.W.2d 734 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). “A pretrial conference was held on November 30, 1992, and trial was scheduled for February 12, 1993. On the date scheduled for trial, the court granted defendant’s motion to quash the habitual offender information.”
People v. Taylor, 502 N.W.2d 348 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
People v. Bowman, 502 N.W.2d 192 (Mich. 1993).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.131(2)(a) — 1 case
People v. McCullum, 507 N.W.2d 3 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.131(2)(b) — 1 case
People v. Chavies, 593 N.W.2d 655 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).
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.