“The general venue rule is that defendants should be tried in the county where the crime was committed. ‘[E]xcept as the legislature for the furtherance of justice has otherwise provided reasonably and within the requirements of due process, the trial should be by a jury of the county or city where the offense was committed.’” People v Houthoofd, 487 Mich 568, 579 (2010) (citations omitted).
Venue is prescribed by statute and is generally dependent upon the location of the criminal conduct.1 See MCL 600.8312. Additionally, certain statutes establish venue for offenses that may involve more than one location. See, e.g., MCL 762.8 (felony consisting of two or more acts); MCL 762.10 (embezzlement); MCL 762.10c (identity theft).
“[T]erritorial jurisdiction and venue are two different concepts. ‘[J]urisdiction refers to the judicial power to hear and determine a criminal prosecution, whereas venue relates to and defines the place where the prosecution is to be brought or tried.’” People v Gayheart, 285 Mich App 202, 215-216 (2009) (citations omitted).
“[V]enue is not an essential element of a criminal offense[.]” Gayheart, 285 Mich App at 216 (citations omitted). However, “the determination of venue is a question of fact for the jury, and the existence of venue ‘must be proved by the prosecutor beyond a reasonable doubt[.]’” Id. (citations omitted). The existence of venue may be proven by circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence. Id. (citations omitted).
1 See Section 2.12.