3.10Issuing an Arrest Warrant

An arrest warrant is an order by a court to arrest a person and bring him or her before the court to answer to the charge alleged in the complaint and to be further dealt with according to law. MCL 764.1b. For a summary of the arrest warrant process, see the Michigan Judicial Institute’s checklist describing the process for issuing an arrest warrant and the checklist describing the process for electronically issuing an arrest warrant.

“If an accused is arrested without a warrant, a complaint complying with MCR 6.101 must be filed at or before the time of arraignment.” MCR 6.104(D). “On receiving the complaint and on finding probable cause, the court must either issue a warrant or endorse the complaint as provided in MCL 764.1c.” MCR 6.104(D). “Arraignment of the accused may then proceed in accordance with [MCR 6.104(E)].” MCR 6.104(D). Stated another way, the court must either sign/issue the warrant or endorse the complaint before proceeding to arraignment. MCR 6.104(D).

A complaint may also serve as a warrant if the officer makes a warrantless arrest of a person, he or she is in custody, and the court endorses the complaint with a finding of probable cause.   MCL 764.1c(2); MCR 6.104(D).

The proper sanction to be imposed for arresting an individual based on an invalid arrest warrant is the suppression of evidence obtained from the person following his or her illegal arrest, not divestiture of the court’s jurisdiction. People v Burrill, 391 Mich 124, 133 (1974). Thus, even if the complaint or warrant is later determined to be invalid, the court retains jurisdiction. Id. See also Whiteley v Warden, Wyoming State Penitentiary, 401 US 560, 565 (1971) (where no probable cause supported either the warrant or a warrantless arrest, evidence secured as a result of the illegal arrest should have been suppressed); People v Muhammad, 326 Mich App 40, 72 (2018) (“irrespective of whether there were errors associated with the warrant, defendant is not entitled to relief”).

A.Requirement to Determine Parolee Status

Before an arrest warrant is issued, the law enforcement agency seeking the warrant must use the Law Enforcement Information Network (LEIN) to determine whether the individual for whom the warrant is sought is a parolee under the jurisdiction of the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC). MCL 764.1g(1). If the person is determined to be a parolee under the MDOC’s jurisdiction, and an arrest warrant is issued, MCL 764.1g(1) requires that the MDOC be notified and provided with the following information, by telephone or other electronic means:¹

“(a) The identity of the person named in the warrant.

(b) The fact that information in databases managed by the [MDOC] and accessible by the [LEIN] provides reason to believe the person named in the warrant is a parolee under the jurisdiction of the [MDOC].

(c) The charge or charges stated in the warrant.”

The MDOC must also be notified if there is a delay in the process:

“If the court has assumed the responsibility for entering arrest warrants into the [LEIN] and delays issuance or entry of a warrant pending a court appearance by the person named in the warrant, the law enforcement agency submitting the sworn complaint to the court shall promptly give to the [MDOC], by telephonic or electronic means, notice of the following:

(a) The identity of the person named in the sworn complaint.

(b) The fact that a prosecuting attorney has authorized issuance of a warrant.

(c) The fact that information in databases managed by the [MDOC] and accessible by the [LEIN] provides reason to believe the person named in the sworn complaint is a parolee under the jurisdiction of the [MDOC].

(d) The charge or charges stated in the sworn complaint.

(e) Whether, pending a court appearance by the person named in the sworn complaint, the court has either issued the arrest warrant but delayed entry of the warrant into the [LEIN] or has delayed issuance of the warrant.” MCL 764.1g(2).

Transmitting notice to any of the following satisfies the notice requirements of MCL 764.1g:

“(a) To the [MDOC] by a central toll-free telephone number that is designated by the [MDOC] for that purpose and that is in operation 24 hours a day and is posted in the [MDOC’s] database of information concerning the status of parolees.

(b) To a parole agent serving the county where the warrant is issued or is being sought.

(c) To the supervisor of the parole office serving the county where the warrant is issued or is being sought.” MCL 764.1g(3).

B.Substantive Requirements of Arrest Warrants

An arrest warrant must:

•“recite the substance of the accusation contained in the complaint[,]” MCL 764.1b;

•be directed at a peace officer, MCL 764.1b;

•“command the peace officer immediately to arrest the person accused and to take that person, without unnecessary delay, before a magistrate of the judicial district in which the offense is charged to have been committed, to be dealt with according to law[,]” MCL 764.1b;

•“direct that the warrant, with a proper return noted on the warrant, be delivered to the magistrate before whom the arrested person is to be taken.” MCL 764.1b.

See also MCR 6.102(E), which requires an warrant to:

“(1) contain the accused’s name, if known, or an identifying name or description;

   (2) describe the offense charged in the complaint;

(3) command a peace officer or other person authorized by law to arrest and bring the accused before a judicial officer of the judicial district in which the offense allegedly was committed or some other designated court; and

(4) be signed by the court.”

For a summary of the arrest warrant process, see the Michigan Judicial Institute’s checklist describing the process for issuing an arrest warrant and the checklist describing the process for electronically issuing an arrest warrant.

In addition, MCR 6.102(F) allows the court, when permitted by law, to specify on the warrant an amount of interim bail the accused may post to obtain release before arraignment on the warrant.²

C.Sanctions for Arrest Based on Invalid Arrest Warrant

The proper sanction to be imposed for arresting an individual based on an invalid arrest warrant is the suppression of evidence obtained from the person following his or her illegal arrest, not divestiture of the court’s jurisdiction. People v Burrill, 391 Mich 124, 133 (1974). Thus, even if the complaint or warrant is later determined to be invalid, the court retains jurisdiction. Id. See also Whiteley v Warden, Wyoming State Penitentiary, 401 US 560, 565 (1971) (where no probable cause supported either the warrant or a warrantless arrest, evidence secured as a result of the illegal arrest should have been suppressed); People v Muhammad, 326 Mich App 40, 72 (2018) (“irrespective of whether there were errors associated with the warrant, defendant is not entitled to relief”).