No! You have a constitutional right to remain silent. Politely state that you are exercising this right and that you wish to speak with an attorney immediately. Anything you say can and will be used against you by the prosecution.

OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) means driving with a BAC of 0.08% or higher, or that alcohol/drugs substantially affected your ability to drive. OWVI (Operating While Visibly Impaired) is a lesser charge, meaning your ability to drive was visibly impaired by alcohol or drugs, even if your BAC was below 0.08%. If you have been charged with either, you should call an attorney to discuss your options.

Not necessarily. In Michigan, the prosecutor's office, not the alleged victim, decides whether to press charges. The prosecutor can compel the accuser to testify and may proceed with the case if they believe there is enough other evidence to secure a conviction, even if the accuser wishes to drop it. If you or someone you know has been charged with domestic violence, an attorney may be able to help minimize any potential damage.

The timeline varies greatly. A simple misdemeanor might be resolved in a few months, while a complex felony case set for trial could take a year or longer. The duration depends on the complexity of the evidence, the court's schedule, and the number of legal motions filed by your attorney and the prosecution.

Police can only search your vehicle if they have a warrant, your consent, or probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime inside. You have the right to refuse consent to a search. If police ask for permission, it often means they do not have probable cause to search without it. If you have been arrested or have been the victim of an illegal search, contact an attorney.

Michigan's "Clean Slate" legislation, which took full effect in 2021, significantly expanded the number of residents eligible to have old convictions set aside, a process commonly known as expungement. This change reflects a major shift in state policy, moving away from permanent punishment and toward a focus on rehabilitation and removing barriers to employment and housing for those who have remained law-abiding. For individuals in Grand Rapids and across the state who were previously told they were ineligible, this new law creates a critical opportunity to re-evaluate their options and seek a fresh start. Under the expanded criteria, a person may petition to set aside up to three felony convictions and an unlimited number of misdemeanors. However, certain limitations apply: An individual cannot have more than two "assaultive crime" convictions set aside in their lifetime. No more than one felony conviction for the same offense may be set aside if that crime is punishable by more than 10 years in prison. Multiple felonies or misdemeanors that arise from the same 24-hour period are generally treated as a single conviction for expungement purposes, provided none of the offenses are assaultive, involve a dangerous weapon, or carry a maximum penalty of 10 or more years in prison. The waiting period to apply begins after the individual has fully completed their sentence, including any probation, parole, or incarceration. The required conviction-free waiting periods are three years for misdemeanors, five years for serious misdemeanors or a single felony, and seven years for multiple felonies. Certain very serious offenses, such as those punishable by life in prison, most criminal sexual conduct offenses, and traffic offenses causing death or serious injury, remain ineligible for expungement. A knowledgeable Grand Rapids attorney is crucial for navigating Michigan's Clean Slate legislation. At the Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson, we can determine your eligibility, which depends on the type and number of offenses, and guide you through the complex petitioning process in Kent County and surrounding courts, such as the 17th Circuit Court or district courts like the 61st District Court in Grand Rapids. We handle the detailed paperwork and represent you in court to ensure your case for setting aside a conviction is presented effectively.

Refusing an evidentiary chemical test (breath, blood, or urine) after a lawful OWI arrest in Michigan triggers serious and immediate administrative consequences that are entirely separate from the criminal OWI charge. This situation creates two parallel legal battles that must be fought simultaneously, and a victory in the criminal case does not automatically resolve the license suspension. An experienced OWI attorney in Grand Rapids can be crucial in navigating both proceedings. Under Michigan's Implied Consent law, every person who accepts a driver's license has implicitly agreed to submit to a chemical test if arrested for drunk or drugged driving. Refusing this test is not a criminal offense, but it results in an automatic administrative penalty from the Michigan Secretary of State. For a first refusal, the penalty is a one-year "hard" suspension of your driver's license and the addition of six points to your driving record. For a second refusal within seven years, the suspension increases to two years. Upon refusal, the police officer will issue a DI-93 form, which serves as a notice of the impending suspension. You have only 14 days from the date of the refusal to file a request for an Implied Consent Hearing with the Secretary of State to challenge the suspension. This is a critical deadline; missing it results in the automatic loss of your license for the full term. The hearing is a separate administrative proceeding that focuses only on four specific issues: whether the officer had reasonable grounds for the arrest, whether you were properly advised of your rights, and whether you unreasonably refused the test. An acquittal on the criminal OWI charge will not overturn the license suspension if the refusal is upheld at the administrative hearing. If you've been arrested for an OWI in Grand Rapids and refused the chemical test, you must act fast. The Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson provides aggressive representation for clients across Kent County facing both the criminal charge in courts like the 61st District Court and the administrative license suspension. We understand the high stakes and will immediately file the necessary paperwork to challenge the one-year suspension at an Implied Consent Hearing. Our Grand Rapids OWI defense lawyers are experienced in fighting both battles simultaneously to protect your freedom and your driving privileges.

The Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA), found in MCL 762.11, is a special legal status in Michigan that allows a young offender to avoid a permanent public criminal conviction. 22It is designed for individuals who committed a crime after their 17th birthday but before their 24th birthday, recognizing that people in this age group may make immature mistakes that should not carry lifelong consequences. The primary benefit of HYTA is that if the individual successfully completes a term of probation or other court-ordered supervision, the criminal case against them is dismissed, and the record becomes non-public. This means the conviction will not appear on public background checks for employment or housing. However, HYTA is not a "get out of jail free card"; it is a high-stakes probationary period. To receive HYTA status, the individual must first plead guilty to the offense. If they then violate any term of their probation, the judge can revoke their HYTA status and enter the conviction on their permanent public record, often imposing a jail or prison sentence at that time. Eligibility is limited. The crime must have been committed between the ages of 17 and 23. Certain offenses are excluded, including traffic offenses like OWI, major controlled substance offenses, and most criminal sexual conduct crimes. For offenders who committed their crime between the ages of 21 and 23, the prosecutor must consent to granting HYTA status, giving them a veto power over the judge's decision. Securing HYTA status can be a life-changing opportunity, and having the right legal guidance is essential. The Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson has extensive experience advocating for young clients in Grand Rapids and Kent County courts to obtain HYTA status. We work to persuade judges and, when necessary, prosecutors that our client is a suitable candidate for this program. If you (or your son or daughter) is facing criminal charges in West Michigan, our firm can build a compelling case to help them avoid a permanent conviction and protect their future.

A Personal Protection Order (PPO) is an injunctive order issued by a circuit court judge to protect a person from harassment, stalking, violence, or threats from another individual. The process is designed to provide immediate safety, but the person seeking the order (the petitioner) must be prepared to defend their request in court if the person being restrained (the respondent) challenges it. There are two primary types of PPOs, determined by the relationship between the parties: Domestic Relationship PPO: This is used when the respondent is a current or former spouse, a person with whom the petitioner has a child in common, a current or former dating partner, or a current or former resident of the same household. Non-Domestic (Stalking) PPO: This is used when there is no domestic relationship, but the respondent has engaged in a pattern of stalking or harassment that causes the petitioner to feel threatened or terrorized. The process begins by filing a "Petition for Personal Protection Order" with the circuit court, detailing the specific acts of harassment or violence and the dates they occurred. The petitioner can request an ex parte order, which is an emergency order that a judge can sign immediately without a hearing and without the respondent's knowledge. If granted, the ex parte PPO is effective as soon as it is signed and is valid for at least 182 days. Once the PPO is issued, it must be served on the respondent. The respondent then has 14 days to file a motion to modify or terminate the PPO, which will trigger a full court hearing. At this hearing, both sides can present evidence and testimony, and the judge will decide whether to continue, modify, or terminate the order. A PPO can prohibit the respondent from contacting the petitioner, entering their property, appearing at their workplace, purchasing a firearm, and other specific actions designed to ensure the petitioner's safety. Whether you are seeking to obtain a PPO for your safety or need to defend against one that has been unjustly filed against you, our Grand Rapids attorneys at the Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson can provide skilled legal representation. We handle PPO matters in the Kent County Circuit Court, guiding petitioners through the process of filing a detailed petition and representing them at the hearing. For respondents, we work to protect your rights by challenging false or exaggerated claims. In these emotionally charged situations, our firm provides the objective and effective advocacy needed to secure a just outcome.

An arraignment is a defendant's first formal appearance in court after being charged with a crime. While it may seem like a brief formality, it is a critical stage where the conditions of a person's freedom for the entire duration of the case are established. Having a Kent County criminal lawyer by your side is essential. During the arraignment, the judge will perform several key functions: Inform you of the charges: The judge will state the formal criminal charges filed against you and explain the maximum possible penalties, including jail or prison time, fines, and other consequences. Advise you of your rights: You will be informed of your constitutional rights, including the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, the court will determine if you are indigent and appoint one for you. Take your plea: You will be asked to enter a plea of "guilty," "not guilty," or "stand mute" (which the court treats as a not guilty plea). It is almost always advisable to plead not guilty at the arraignment to allow your attorney time to review the evidence and explore potential defenses. Set bond conditions: This is often the most impactful part of the arraignment. The judge will decide whether to release you while the case is pending and under what conditions. This can range from a "Personal Recognizance" (PR) bond, where you are released on your promise to appear, to a cash or surety bond that requires money to be posted for your release. The judge considers factors like the seriousness of the charge, your criminal history, and your ties to the community to assess your flight risk and potential danger to the public. For defendants who are in custody, arraignments in Kent County are typically conducted by video from the jail. The arraignment sets the tone for your entire case, and being represented by an experienced lawyer is vital. Our Grand Rapids criminal defense attorneys at the Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson make it a priority to be by your side at this first court appearance in the 61st District Court or other Kent County courts. We will advocate strongly on your behalf to secure a reasonable bond, ensuring you can remain out of custody while your case is pending. By presenting the judge with key information about your community ties and character, we work to achieve the least restrictive bond conditions possible.

Probation and parole are often confused, but they are distinct legal concepts representing different stages of the criminal justice process. Both involve supervision within the community, but they are imposed at different times and by different authorities. Probation is a criminal sentence. A judge imposes a term of probation instead of sending a person to jail or prison, or sometimes in addition to a short jail sentence. The offender is released into the community but must abide by a set of strict conditions ordered by the court, such as regular reporting to a probation officer, drug testing, paying fines, and avoiding new criminal activity. The length of probation can be up to two years for a misdemeanor and up to five years for a felony. If a person violates their probation, they face a hearing before the judge, who can then impose a new sentence, including incarceration. Parole, on the other hand, is not a sentence. It is a period of supervised release that occurs after an offender has already served a portion of their sentence in a state prison. The Michigan Parole Board, not a judge, has the authority to grant parole to eligible prisoners. A person on parole is supervised by a parole agent and must follow conditions set by the Parole Board. A violation of parole carries a more direct and severe consequence: the Parole Board can revoke parole and send the individual back to prison to complete their original sentence. If you are accused of violating the terms of your probation in Grand Rapids, you need a defense attorney to protect you from being sent to jail. The Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson provides aggressive representation at probation violation hearings in Kent County courts. We scrutinize the prosecution's evidence and advocate for alternatives to incarceration, such as continuing your probation with modified terms. We understand that a violation can have severe consequences, and we work tirelessly to present your case in the most favorable light to the judge.

In any drug prosecution, the government bears the burden of proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the substance seized by police is in fact an illegal controlled substance. This requires a scientific analysis, typically performed by a forensic scientist at a Michigan State Police (MSP) crime lab. While a lab report may seem like definitive scientific proof, it is a piece of evidence created by an often under-resourced and overburdened system, making it a fertile ground for a skilled Michigan criminal defense attorney to challenge. An experienced defense attorney can challenge the crime lab analysis in several ways: Chain of Custody: The prosecution must account for the evidence from the moment it was seized until it was analyzed in the lab. A defense attorney will scrutinize the chain of custody records for any gaps, inconsistencies, or procedural errors that could suggest the evidence was contaminated, mishandled, or tampered with. A broken chain of custody can render the lab results inadmissible. Lab Procedures and Errors: MSP crime labs, like any scientific facility, are susceptible to human and systemic error. An attorney can obtain the lab's records and protocols to investigate issues such as improper equipment calibration, poor quality control, clerical mistakes, or evidence of past issues at a specific lab or with a particular analyst. Cross-Examination of the Analyst: The forensic scientist who performed the analysis is a witness who must testify at trial. This provides a critical opportunity for a defense attorney to cross-examine the analyst under oath. The attorney can question their qualifications, their specific testing methodology, the potential for false positives, and any deviations from standard procedure, all in an effort to create reasonable doubt about the reliability of their conclusions. Challenging the state's forensic evidence is a cornerstone of a strong defense in any drug case. The Grand Rapids drug crime attorneys at the Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson have the experience to meticulously review the prosecution's case, including the MSP crime lab report. We investigate every step of the process, from the initial seizure to the final analysis, looking for weaknesses in the chain of custody and procedural errors. By skillfully cross-examining the lab analyst at trial in Kent County courts, we can create the reasonable doubt necessary to protect our clients' freedom.

A plea of nolo contendere, Latin for "I do not wish to contend," is commonly known as a "no contest" plea. In the Michigan criminal justice system, it is a strategic alternative to a guilty or not guilty plea. When a defendant enters a no contest plea, they are not admitting guilt to the criminal charge; however, they are accepting the court's imposition of a conviction and sentence as if they had pleaded guilty. This type of plea requires the judge's permission to be entered. The primary strategic advantage of a no contest plea is its effect on potential civil litigation. A key legal principle is that a no contest plea in a criminal case cannot be used as an admission of guilt or liability against the defendant in a subsequent civil lawsuit arising from the same incident. This separation of consequences is crucial for managing a defendant's total legal exposure. For example, consider a driver who causes a car accident resulting in injuries and is charged with reckless driving. If the driver pleads guilty, that plea is a direct admission of fault that can be used against them in a personal injury lawsuit filed by the victim. However, if the court accepts a no contest plea, the driver will still be sentenced for the criminal charge, but the victim in the civil lawsuit cannot use that plea as evidence that the driver admitted to being at fault for the accident. This forces the victim to prove liability in the civil case independently, without the powerful shortcut of a guilty plea. Deciding how to plead to a criminal charge is a critical decision that requires careful legal analysis. Our Grand Rapids criminal defense lawyers can advise you on whether a "no contest" plea is a viable and strategic option in your case. We evaluate the specific circumstances, particularly if there is a risk of a future civil lawsuit, and can petition the Kent County courts for permission to enter a nolo contendere plea. This is just one of the ways the Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson works to minimize the overall consequences of a criminal charge for our clients in West Michigan.

Michigan's Sentencing Guidelines are a complex, points-based system that judges must use to determine the minimum sentence range for most felony convictions. The purpose of the guidelines is to promote consistency and proportionality in sentencing, ensuring that offenders who commit similar crimes with similar criminal histories receive similar sentences. The calculation involves scoring two sets of variables: Prior Record Variables (PRVs): These variables score the defendant's past criminal history. Points are assigned for prior felony and misdemeanor convictions, the defendant's relationship to the criminal justice system at the time of the new offense (e.g., on probation or parole), and other historical factors. Offense Variables (OVs): These variables score the specific circumstances and nature of the crime for which the defendant is being sentenced. Points are assigned for factors like the use of a weapon, physical or psychological injury to a victim, the amount of drugs or money involved, and the offender's role in the crime. Once the PRVs and OVs are scored, the total points for each category are plotted on a sentencing grid corresponding to the crime's severity class. The intersection of the PRV level and OV level on the grid provides a specific minimum sentence range in months (e.g., 24 to 48 months). While the guidelines are considered advisory, a judge must impose a sentence within this range unless they can state "substantial and compelling" reasons on the record for departing from it. The sentencing hearing is often a critical battleground where a defense attorney's primary role is not just to argue for leniency, but to challenge the mechanical scoring of the guidelines. A successful argument to reduce the points for even one or two variables can shift the defendant into a lower range on the grid, potentially reducing their minimum prison sentence by years. The sentencing hearing is arguably the most critical stage of a felony case. Our Grand Rapids criminal defense attorneys at the Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson excel at challenging the scoring of the sentencing guidelines in the Kent County Circuit Court. We meticulously review the presentence investigation report and argue against the improper scoring of Offense Variables and Prior Record Variables. A successful challenge can significantly lower the guideline range, potentially resulting in a sentence of probation instead of prison. Our goal is to secure the most favorable and lenient sentence possible for our clients.

Yes. The right to a trial by an impartial jury is a cornerstone of the American justice system and is guaranteed by both the U.S. and Michigan Constitutions. In Michigan, this right is not limited to serious felony cases; it extends to every criminal prosecution, including misdemeanor charges. Article I, Section 20 of the Michigan Constitution explicitly states that "In every criminal prosecution, the accused shall have the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury". This provides a fundamental constitutional safeguard, ensuring that the power of the state to impose a criminal conviction and penalty is checked by a panel of ordinary citizens from the community. For misdemeanor offenses that are punishable by not more than one year in jail, the jury may consist of fewer than twelve people; Michigan district courts typically use a jury of six for these cases. A defendant can choose to waive their right to a jury trial and instead have a "bench trial," where the judge alone hears the evidence and decides the verdict of guilty or not guilty. However, the decision to waive a jury is a significant one that should only be made after careful consultation with a defense attorney. The right to a jury of one's peers ensures that the final verdict reflects community judgment and prevents a single judicial officer from holding sole power over a person's liberty, even in what might be considered a "minor" case. Even for a misdemeanor charge, the decision to go to trial is a serious one. Our Grand Rapids criminal defense lawyers are skilled trial attorneys, prepared to defend your rights before a jury in the 61st District Court or any other court in West Michigan. The Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson will thoroughly analyze the evidence, prepare a powerful defense, and advise you on whether a jury trial or a bench trial is the best strategic option for your specific case. We are committed to holding the prosecution to its burden of proof and fighting for a "not guilty" verdict.