Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 780 / Act 189 of 1966
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.654 (2026)

Search warrant; direction of warrant; contents; order to suppress affidavit.

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

SEARCH WARRANTS


Act 189 of 1966


780.654 Search warrant; direction of warrant; contents; order to suppress affidavit.

Sec. 4.

    (1) A search warrant shall be directed to the sheriff or any peace officer, commanding the sheriff or peace officer to search the house, building, or other location or place, where the person, property, or thing for which the sheriff or peace officer is required to search is believed to be concealed. Each warrant shall designate and describe the house or building or other location or place to be searched and the property or thing to be seized.

    (2) The warrant shall either state the grounds or the probable or reasonable cause for its issuance or shall have attached to it a copy of the affidavit.

    (3) Upon a showing that it is necessary to protect an ongoing investigation or the privacy or safety of a victim or witness, the magistrate may order that the affidavit be suppressed and not be given to the person whose property was seized or whose premises were searched until that person is charged with a crime or named as a claimant in a civil forfeiture proceeding involving evidence seized as a result of the search.

History: 1966, Act 189, Eff. Mar. 10, 1967 ;-- Am. 2002, Act 112, Eff. Apr. 22, 2002 ;-- Am. 2009, Act 11, Imd. Eff. Apr. 9, 2009

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1974–2024 · leading case: People v. Sobczak-Obetts, 625 N.W.2d 764 (Mich. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Sobczak-Obetts, 625 N.W.2d 764 (Mich. 2001). · cites it 22× “Following two hearings on the motion to suppress, the trial court held that the motion had to be granted on the ground that defendant was not provided with a copy of the affidavit in support of the search warrant at the time of the search in contravention of MCL 780.654; MSA…”
People v. Garvin, 597 N.W.2d 194 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 10× “MCL 780.654; MSA 28.1259(4) provides: A search warrant shall be directed to the sheriff or any peace officer, commanding such officer to search the house, building or other location or place, where any property or other thing for which he is required to search is believed to be…”
People v. Sobczak-Obetts, 606 N.W.2d 658 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 18× “Each warrant shall designate and describe the house or building or other location or place to be searched and the property or thing to be seized.”
People v. Chapin, 624 N.W.2d 769 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 28× “1259(4) provides that the warrant shall contain the grounds or the probable cause or, in lieu thereof, attach a copy of the affidavit: A search warrant shall be directed to the sheriff or any peace officer, commanding such officer to search the house, building or other location…”
People v. Unger, 749 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “US Const, Am IV; Const 1963, art 1, § 11; MCL 780.654(1). The amount of specificity required will vary with the circumstances and the types of items involved.”
People v. Anstey, 719 N.W.2d 579 (Mich. 2006). · cites it 2× “In Sobczak-Obetts , the police violated MCL 780.654 and 780.655 by failing to produce an affidavit with the otherwise valid warrant used to search the defendant's home.”
People v. Hellstrom, 690 N.W.2d 293 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 780.654(1). The purpose of this requirement is to provide reasonable guidance to the officers executing the search with regard to the items to be seized and to prevent unfettered discretion in this determination.”
People v. Martin, 721 N.W.2d 815 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “With regard to the search warrant for 3918 Merriman, defendant also claims that the search warrant inappropriately authorized the seizure of evidence related to the activities and day-to-day operations of the bar without clarifying which bar was referred to in the search…”
People v. Collins, 475 N.W.2d 684 (Mich. 1991). · cites it 2× “" [57] Absent the availability of participant monitoring to establish probable cause, the police may be unable to secure a valid warrant, virtually assuring a credibility contest at trial between the uncorroborated testimony of the informant and the frequently corroborated…”
People v. Fetterley, 583 N.W.2d 199 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). “The trial court found that the checkbook was included within the list of items to be searched for and seized at the trailer. Under both federal law and Michigan law, the purpose of the particularization requirement in the description of items to be seized is to provide…”
People v. Zuccarini, 431 N.W.2d 446 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “Under both federal constitutional law and Michigan search and seizure law, the purpose of the particularization requirement in the description of items to be seized is to provide reasonable guidance to the executing officers and to prevent their exercise of undirected discretion…”
People v. Hamilton, 638 N.W.2d 92 (Mich. 2002). “See People v Sobczak-Obetts, supra (failure to comply with the statutory *535 requirement that an affidavit in support of a search warrant be left with the defendant at the time of execution of the warrant, MCL 780.654, 780.655); People v Stevens, supra (failure to comply with…”
Show all 29 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.654(1) — 3 cases
People v. Unger, 749 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “US Const, Am IV; Const 1963, art 1, § 11; MCL 780.654(1). The amount of specificity required will vary with the circumstances and the types of items involved.”
People v. Hellstrom, 690 N.W.2d 293 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “§ 780.654(1). The purpose of this requirement is to provide reasonable guidance to the officers executing the search with regard to the items to be seized and to prevent unfettered discretion in this determination.”
People of Michigan v. Joshua Wayne Carr (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.654(2) — 5 cases
People of Michigan v. Maryanne Godboldo (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
People of Michigan v. Matthew Martin IV (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
In Re Adeyo James Ilemobade (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
People of Michigan v. Joshua Wayne Carr (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
People of Michigan v. Ebony Jewel Mahone (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.654(3) — 1 case
People of Michigan v. Matthew Martin IV (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
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.