Chapter 2: Jurisdiction, Transfer, and Venue

In this chapter. . .

This chapter discusses:

•Jurisdiction over juvenile offenders

•Transfer of cases because of age, residence, or membership in an Indian tribe

•Interstate Compact for Juveniles

•Judges and referees in juvenile proceedings

•Requesting judicial review of a referee’s recommendation

Related topics are discussed elsewhere in this benchbook. For a discussion of the extension of jurisdiction, see Section 12.2. Placement of juveniles in other states is discussed in Section 10.10(E).

2.1Jurisdiction Over Juvenile Offenders

Before January 1, 1998, the juvenile division of the probate court had “original jurisdiction in all cases of juvenile delinquents . . . except as otherwise provided by law.” Const 1963, art 6, § 15. Effective January 1, 1998, the newly created Family Division of Circuit Court (“Family Division”) was assigned jurisdiction over “[c]ases involving juveniles as provided in [the Juvenile Code], MCL 712A.1 to [MCL] 712A.32.”1 MCL 600.1021(1)(e). See also MCL 600.601(4); MCL 600.1001; MCL 712A.1(1)(e). As used in the Juvenile Code, the term juvenile generally   refers to a person who is less than 18 years of age. See MCL 712A.1(1)(i); MCL 712A.2(a).2 The term juvenile also includes “a person 18 years of age or older . . . over whom the [Family Division] has continuing jurisdiction[.]” MCL 712A.2a(9). See also MCR 3.903(B)(2) (when used in delinquency proceedings, “juvenile” generally means “a minor alleged or found to be within the jurisdiction of the [Family Division] for having committed an offense”); MCR 3.903(A)(16) (when used in subchapter 3.900 of the Michigan Court Rules, “‘[m]inor’ means a person under the age of 18, and may include a person of age 18 or older over whom the [Family Division] has continuing jurisdiction pursuant to MCL 712A.2a”).3

The scope of the Family Division’s jurisdiction under the Juvenile Code is dependent upon the age of a juvenile and the type of proceeding. “Except as otherwise provided in [MCL 712A.2(a)(1)],” the Family Division has “[e]xclusive original jurisdiction superior to and regardless of the jurisdiction of another court” over a proceeding in which a juvenile under the age of 18 is accused of violating a law or ordinance, MCL 712A.2(a)(1), or of committing a status offense,4 MCL 712A.2(a)(2)-(4). The Family Division also has jurisdiction over proceedings involving personal protection orders (PPOs), including a PPO proceeding in which a juvenile under the age of 18 is the respondent,5 MCL 712A.2(h); MCL 600.1021(1)(k).6

The Family Division and the court of general criminal jurisdiction have concurrent jurisdiction over certain classes of cases. The Family Division has jurisdiction over a juvenile between the ages of 14 and 18 who is charged with a specified juvenile violation only if the prosecutor files a petition in the Family Division rather than in the court of general criminal jurisdiction. MCL 712A.2(a)(1); People v Veling, 443 Mich 23, 30-31 (1993).7 The Family Division may waive its jurisdiction over a proceeding in which a juvenile 14, 15, 16, or 17 years of age is accused of an act that if committed by an adult would be a felony (traditional waiver proceedings).8 MCL 712A.4. The Family Division also has concurrent jurisdiction over proceedings involving 17-year-old “wayward minors.”9 MCL 712A.2(d). Additionally, the Family Division has concurrent jurisdiction over “proceedings concerning a juvenile under 18 years of age” if “the juvenile is dependent and is in danger of substantial physical or psychological harm” under certain circumstances, MCL 712A.2(b)(3), including if the juvenile “is alleged to have committed a commercial sexual activity” under MCL 750.462a “or a delinquent act that is the result of force, fraud, coercion, or manipulation exercised by a parent or other adult,” MCL 712A.2(b)(3)(C).10

“[T]he birthday rule of age calculation applies in Michigan.” People v Woolfolk, 304 Mich App 450, 504 (2014), aff’d 497 Mich 23 (2014). Under the birthday rule, “‘a person attains a given age on the anniversary date of his or her birth.’” Woolfolk, 304 Mich App at 461, 464, 506 (holding that the common-law rule of age calculation, under which “‘one becomes of full age the first moment of the day before’ the anniversary of his or her birth,” is inapplicable in Michigan, and that the defendant, who shot and killed the victim on the day before the defendant’s eighteenth birthday, “was not yet eighteen years of age when the shooting occurred”) (emphasis supplied; citations omitted).

“A circuit court’s authority to exercise jurisdiction over a defendant charged with a felony committed as a minor constitutes a question of personal, not subject matter, jurisdiction.” People v Kiyoshk, 493 Mich 923, 923 (2013). “[A d]efendant’s age when [an] offense was committed does not pertain to the ‘kind or character’ of the case, but rather constitutes a defendant-specific, ‘particular fact[’; thus, w]hether [a] defendant [is] of an age that ma[kes] circuit court jurisdiction appropriate is . . . a question of personal jurisdiction.” Id. at 923-924 (quoting People v Lown, 488 Mich 242, 268 (2011),11 and holding that because “‘[a] party may stipulate to, waive, or implicitly consent to personal jurisdiction,’” the juvenile defendant, “by entering a guilty plea in the circuit court[] and failing to contest the circuit court’s jurisdiction, . . . implicitly consented to that court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction”).

Once the Family Division establishes personal jurisdiction over a juvenile, it must “order the juvenile returned to his or her parent if the return of the juvenile to his or her parent would not cause a substantial risk of harm to the juvenile or society.” MCL 712A.18(1). The court also has incidental jurisdiction to “make orders affecting adults as in the opinion of the court are necessary for the physical, mental, or moral well-being of a particular juvenile or juveniles under its jurisdiction.” MCL 712A.6; see also In re Contempt of Dorsey, 306 Mich App 571, 582-583 (2014), vacated in part on other grounds and aff’d in part 499 Mich 948 (2016)12; In re Macomber, 436 Mich 386, 390-391 (1990).13 Furthermore, where a “court conclude[s] that [a parent has] interfered with the court’s [judicial] function, [he or she may] be punished for contempt.” In re Contempt of Dorsey, 306 Mich App at 583 (citation omitted).

Additionally, MCL 712A.2(i) provides:

“In a proceeding under [the Juvenile Code] concerning a juvenile’s care and supervision, the court may issue orders affecting a party as necessary. This subdivision does not apply after May 1, 2018. As used in this subdivision, ‘party’ means 1 of the following:

(i) In a delinquency proceeding, the petitioner and juvenile.

(ii) In a child protective proceeding, the petitioner, department, child, respondent, parent, guardian, or legal custodian, and any licensed child caring institution or child placing agency under contract with the department to provide for a juvenile’s care and supervision.”

The failure to provide adequate notice of proceedings as required by statute constitutes a jurisdictional defect. See MCL 712A.12; In re AMB, 248 Mich App 144, 173 (2001); In re Mayfield, 198 Mich App 226, 230-231 (1993).

1    MCL 600.1009 states that a reference to the former juvenile division of probate court in any statute shall be construed as a reference to the Family Division of Circuit Court. See also MCL 712A.1(1)(e); MCR 3.903(A)(4) (“[c]ourt” means the Family Division of Circuit Court when used in the Juvenile Code, MCL 712A.1 et seq., and in subchapter 3.900 of the Michigan Court Rules [“Proceedings Involving Juveniles”]).

2   Prior to October 1, 2021, the term juvenile generally referred to a person less than 17 years of age. MCL 712A.1(1)(i). See also 2019 PA 113, amending MCL 712A.2(a) effective October 1, 2021.

3    See Section 12.2 for a discussion of continuing jurisdiction over a juvenile.

4    See Section 2.3 for a discussion of status offenses.

5    See Chapter 13 for discussion of minor personal protection order proceedings.

6    The Family Division has exclusive jurisdiction over several other types of cases that are outside the scope of this benchbook, such as termination of parental rights, divorce, adoption, child custody, paternity, and child support proceedings. See MCL 600.1021(1); see also MCL 712A.2(b)-(c).

7    See Chapter 16 for discussion of automatic waiver proceedings.

8    See Chapter 14 for discussion of traditional waiver proceedings.

9    The Michigan Court Rules generally refer to the provisions of MCL 712A.2(a)(2)-(4) and MCL 712A.2(d)(1)-(5) as “status offenses.” See MCR 3.903(F) (referring to status offenses as “violation[s] of MCL 712A.2(a)(2)-(4) or [MCL 712A.2](d)” (emphasis supplied); see also MCR 3.905(B); MCR 3.905(C); MCR 3.935(B)(5). However, for ease of reference, this benchbook will refer to the provisions of MCL 712A.2(d)(1)-(5) as governing “wayward minors.” See Section 2.3(D) for a discussion of these provisions.

10    In addition, the Family Division has ancillary jurisdiction over cases involving guardians and conservators as provided in article 5 of the Estates and Protected Individuals Code (EPIC), MCL 700.5101 et seq., and over cases involving mentally ill or developmentally disabled persons under the Mental Health Code, MCL 330.1001 et seq. MCL 600.1021(2)(a)-(b).

11    “‘Subject matter jurisdiction concerns a court’s abstract power to try a case of the kind or character of the one pending and is not dependent on the particular facts of the case.’” Kiyoshk, 493 Mich at 923, quoting Lown, 488 Mich at 268.

12   For more information on the precedential value of an opinion with negative subsequent history, see our note.

13    See Section 2.12 for a discussion of the Family Division’s authority to exercise incidental personal jurisdiction over adults.