Fraud charges in Michigan

Penalties in Michigan

Key Michigan rules

• Michigan's false pretenses statute (MCL 750.218) uses tiered dollar thresholds—$200, $1,000, $20,000, and $50,000—to determine the degree of felony charged, making the alleged loss amount critically important at charging and plea stages.
• Identity theft under the Michigan Identity Theft Protection Act (MCL 445.65) is a felony carrying up to 5 years in prison per count, and each separate use of stolen identity information can be charged as a distinct offense.
• Michigan imposes mandatory restitution in fraud cases; courts are required to order defendants to repay victims for all financial losses traceable to the offense, separate from any fines imposed.
• Professional license holders—including attorneys, CPAs, real estate agents, and financial advisors—face mandatory reporting to their licensing board upon conviction, and a fraud-related felony typically triggers suspension or revocation proceedings independent of the criminal case.
• Securities fraud violations prosecuted under the Michigan Uniform Securities Act (MCL 451.2508) can result in up to 10 years in prison and fines up to $500,000 per violation, and the Michigan Department of Attorney General maintains a dedicated unit for such cases.

Diversion, sealing & second chances

Michigan's Holmes Youthful Trainee Act is generally unavailable for serious felony fraud charges, but some county prosecutors offer diversion or delayed sentencing programs for first-time, lower-level offenders that can result in dismissal upon compliance. Michigan's Clean Slate expungement law, expanded in 2021, allows certain fraud-related felonies to be expunged after a waiting period, though offenses involving more than $15,000 in losses or convictions involving a financial institution may be excluded from eligibility.

What the prosecution must prove

• A scheme or artifice to defraud another person or entity of money, property, or honest services
• An intentional and knowing misrepresentation, concealment, or omission of a material fact — meaning a fact that would matter to a reasonable person making a financial or business decision
• Use of a qualifying instrumentality such as the mail, wire communications, a federally insured financial institution, or interstate commerce to further the scheme
• Specific intent to defraud — the defendant must have acted willfully and not merely made an innocent mistake or business error
• In securities fraud cases, prosecutors also typically must prove that the misrepresentation or omission was made in connection with the purchase or sale of a security and that a victim relied on or was exposed to the fraudulent conduct

Common defenses

• Lack of intent — arguing the defendant made honest mistakes, relied on advice of counsel, or had a good-faith belief that the conduct was lawful, negating the required criminal intent
• Insufficient evidence — challenging whether the government can prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly materiality or the defendant's actual knowledge of the scheme
• Entrapment — asserting that government agents or informants induced the defendant to commit an offense the defendant would not otherwise have committed
• Statute of limitations — many federal fraud offenses carry a five-year limitations period, though it can be extended to ten years for financial-institution fraud, and a charge filed after expiration must be dismissed
• Advice of counsel — demonstrating the defendant disclosed all relevant facts to an attorney and relied in good faith on that attorney's legal guidance can negate willful intent
• Variance or insufficiency in the indictment — contesting that the conduct charged does not legally constitute fraud, or that the government proved a different scheme than what was alleged, potentially requiring dismissal or retrial

Consequences beyond the sentence

• Civil liability and restitution orders requiring repayment of all provable losses to victims, which survive bankruptcy in many cases and can follow a defendant for decades
• Professional license revocation or suspension — lawyers, doctors, accountants, financial advisers, and other licensed professionals routinely lose their licenses upon conviction
• Securities industry bars and SEC disgorgement orders preventing future work in financial services or public companies
• Immigration consequences including deportation or inadmissibility for non-citizens, since fraud offenses are often classified as crimes involving moral turpitude
• Loss of federal benefits, voting rights in some states, and the right to possess firearms, as well as lasting reputational damage that affects future employment and business opportunities

What to do right now

• Retain experienced defense counsel immediately — ideally a lawyer with specific federal white-collar experience — before speaking with investigators, agents, or prosecutors, even if you have not yet been formally charged
• Preserve all potentially relevant documents, emails, financial records, and electronic data, and instruct employees or associates to do the same; destroying or altering records after learning of an investigation can add obstruction charges
• Invoke your Fifth Amendment right to remain silent in any government interview; well-intentioned explanations to agents without an attorney present frequently become the most damaging evidence at trial
• Conduct a privileged internal review with your attorney to understand the full scope of potential exposure, identify witnesses, and assess whether cooperation or a negotiated resolution might be in your interest
• Review and secure all bank accounts, business records, and digital accounts to understand what the government may already have, and discuss with your attorney whether any voluntary disclosures or regulatory self-reporting obligations apply to your situation

Questions to ask a defense lawyer

• What specific federal or state statutes am I charged under, what are the maximum penalties per count, and how does the Sentencing Guidelines calculation look for my alleged conduct and loss amount?
• How strong is the government's evidence of my intent to defraud, and are there viable arguments that my conduct was a good-faith mistake rather than a willful scheme?
• Is cooperation with the government — including providing information about others — a realistic option, and what benefits and risks would that carry compared to going to trial?
• Are there statute of limitations, venue, or constitutional defenses that could lead to dismissal of some or all charges before trial?
• What collateral consequences beyond imprisonment — such as professional license loss, civil liability, restitution, or immigration effects — should I be planning for now, regardless of how the criminal case resolves?