Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 791.225 (2026)

Probation service; compensation of probation officers; service grants.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

CORRECTIONS CODE OF 1953

Act 232 of 1953

791.225 Probation service; compensation of probation officers; service grants.

Sec. 25.

Where the courts of more than 1 county are served by the same probation officer or officers, the compensation of such officer or officers and the expenses of administering probation service within such counties shall be met jointly by the boards of supervisors therein: Provided, That when it shall appear to the commission that any county is unable to adequately maintain its probation program according to the standards set by the state bureau of probation, then service grants to such an extent and under such conditions as the commission may determine, may be made available to said county: Provided, That uniform rules to be followed in making available such service grants first shall be promulgated by the commission.

History: 1953, Act 232, Eff. Oct. 2, 1953

PopularName Notes:

Department of Corrections Act

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1969–1973 · leading case: Wayne Circuit Judges v. Wayne Cnty., 167 N.W.2d 337 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Wayne Circuit Judges v. Wayne Cnty., 167 N.W.2d 337 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “The ways and means committee stated that over a period of years the board of supervisors had sought the cooperation of the judges of the circuit and recorder’s courts to obtain amendatory legislation eliminating the discrimination against Wayne county resulting from the fact…”

Wayne Circuit Judges v. Wayne Cnty., 172 N.W.2d 436 (Mich. 1969). · cites it 4× “" MCLA § 791.225 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.2295).”

Wayne Cnty. v. Corr. Comm'n, 207 N.W.2d 205 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 6× “To this end, the plaintiffs filed an action for a writ of mandamus, and this Court ordered defendants to show cause why plaintiffs should not be granted the relief requested.”

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.