Michigan Sexting Defense Attorneys

When facing allegations related to sexting in Michigan, the complexities of the law and the potential for severe consequences demand experienced and aggressive representation. Nicole Blank Becker of Blank Law, PC, brings over two decades of legal experience in internet sex crimes, including a background as a prosecutor in Macomb and Wayne Counties, providing a unique perspective and strategic advantage in these sensitive cases. Contact our sexting defense attorneys for a free consultation.

Understanding the Nuances of Michigan Law in Sexting Cases

While Michigan does not have a statute specifically labeled “sexting,” the transmission of sexually explicit images or messages, particularly involving minors, falls under stringent criminal statutes. This ambiguity requires a nuanced understanding of how existing laws apply to these situations.

Relevant Michigan Penal Code Sections and Their Application

• Disseminating Sexually Explicit Matter to a Minor (MCL 722.675)
  • This statute targets the knowing distribution of sexually explicit material to a minor. It is crucial to understand that “knowingly” implies the prosecution must prove the defendant was aware of the material’s nature and the minor’s age.
  • Definition: This law criminalizes the act of knowingly distributing visual or verbal sexually explicit material that is harmful to minors, or exhibiting such material to a minor, knowing the nature of the material and the recipient’s age.
  • Penalty: A felony conviction under MCL 722.675 can result in up to two years of imprisonment, a fine of up to $10,000, or both. Notably, unlike many sex offenses, this statute does not mandate registration on the Michigan Sex Offender Registry.
  • It is essential to understand that the definition of what is “harmful to minors” is very subjective and can be litigated in court.
• Possession, Distribution, or Production of Child Sexually Abusive Material (MCL 750.145c)
  • This statute addresses the creation, possession, or distribution of child sexually abusive material, commonly known as child pornography.
  • Definition: MCL 750.145c criminalizes the possession, distribution, or production of any visual or printed material that depicts a minor engaging in a sexual act.
  • Penalty:
    • Possession: A felony, punishable by up to four years in prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000.
    • Distribution: A felony, punishable by up to seven years in prison and/or a fine of up to $50,000.
    • Production: A felony, punishable by up to 20 years in prison and/or a fine of up to $100,000.
    • A conviction under MCL 750.145c mandates registration on the Michigan Sex Offender Registry. This carries life-altering consequences.
• Posting Harmful or Harassing Content Online (MCL 750.411s)
  • This statute addresses online harassment and intimidation, which can include the non-consensual sharing of sexting messages.
  • Definition: MCL 750.411s prohibits using electronic communication to post messages intending to harass, intimidate, or frighten another person.
  • Penalty:
    • A felony, punishable by up to two years in prison and/or a fine of up to $5,000.
    • Aggravated circumstances, such as violating a restraining order or posting explicit content involving a minor, can increase penalties to up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
• Malicious Use of Telecommunications Services (MCL 750.540e)
  • This law pertains to the misuse of telecommunications services to harass, threaten, or intimidate, which can include sexting messages intended to cause distress.
  • Definition: This law prohibits using telecommunications services to harass, threaten, or intimidate someone, including sexting messages to frighten or embarrass the recipient.
  • Penalty:
    • A misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and/or a fine of $1,000.

Jury Instructions: Understanding the Prosecution’s Burden

Jury instructions are pivotal in ensuring a fair trial. In sexting-related cases, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the following:

• That the defendant knowingly possessed, distributed, or created sexually explicit material.
• That the material involved a minor or was shared with a minor.
• The defendant was aware of the nature of the content and the minor’s age.
• It is important to understand that the Jury instructions are very complicated and that a judge’s mistake can cause a mistrial or reverse a conviction.
• For Example, Michigan Criminal Jury Instruction 50.01 deals with child sexually abusive activity. This detailed instruction requires the jury to find specific elements to convict.

Sentencing Considerations: Navigating the Potential Consequences of Sexting

Sentencing in sexting-related cases is highly variable, depending on factors such as:

• The age difference between the individuals involved.
• The intent behind the transmission of the images or messages.
• Whether coercion or pressure was involved.
• The defendant’s prior criminal history.
• The Michigan sentencing guidelines are also essential and must be calculated correctly.
• Eligibility for programs like the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA) or diversion programs can significantly impact the outcome, particularly for first-time offenders. HYTA can allow for the setting aside of a conviction upon successful completion of probation.

Defenses to Sexting Charges: Protecting Your Rights

A robust defense is essential in sexting cases. Potential defenses include:

• Lack of Knowledge: Demonstrating that the defendant was unaware the recipient was a minor.
• Consent: If both parties were of similar age and consensual, challenging the element of exploitation.
• Lack of Intent to Distribute: If the images were not intended for widespread distribution, it mitigates the severity of the charges.
• Unlawful Search and Seizure: Challenging the admissibility of evidence obtained illegally.
• Entrapment: If law enforcement induced the defendant to commit a crime they would not otherwise have committed.
• Challenging the nature of the material: Arguing that the material in question does not meet the legal definition of “sexually explicit.”

Why Choose Nicole Blank Becker of Blank Law, PC?

Nicole Blank Becker’s extensive experience as a former prosecutor and a seasoned defense attorney provides a unique advantage. Her deep understanding of Michigan’s sex crimes laws, combined with her proven track record, ensures that clients receive the highest level of representation. She protects her clients’ rights, reputation, and future.

Take Action Now: Schedule Your Free Consultation

If you or a loved one is facing sexting-related charges in Michigan, immediate action is crucial. Contact Blank Law, PC today for a free consultation and let Nicole Blank Becker provide the aggressive and experienced defense you deserve.