Practice Area
Computer Crimes Defense
Computer crime charges in Michigan carry consequences that can reach far beyond criminal penalties, including loss of professional licenses, termination of employment, academic discipline, and lasting damage to your reputation. These cases are technically complex, fact-intensive, and prosecuted aggressively. If you have been charged with or are under investigation for a computer-related offense, retaining experienced defense counsel as early as possible is critical.
Michigan Computer Crime Charges We Handle
- Unauthorized Access to a Computer / Network: MCL 752.794; accessing a computer, program, or network without authorization
- Computer Fraud: MCL 752.796; using a computer to commit fraud or obtain money, property, or services by false pretenses
- Intentional Destruction or Damage to Computer Systems: MCL 752.795; deleting, altering, or destroying data or systems
- Cyberstalking / Electronic Harassment: MCL 750.411s; repeated electronic contact intended to cause fear or distress
- Identity Theft via Computer: MCL 445.65; obtaining another person’s financial or personal identifying information through electronic means
- Child Sexually Abusive Material (CSAM): possession, distribution, or production; MCL 750.145c; serious felony charges
- Unlawful Interception of Communications: wiretapping and eavesdropping statutes
- Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA): 18 U.S.C. § 1030; federal charges often prosecuted alongside state charges
How Michigan Computer Crime Law Works
Michigan’s primary computer crime statute is the Michigan Penal Code’s Computer Crimes chapter (MCL 752.791 et seq.), which prohibits unauthorized access, computer fraud, and intentional damage to computer systems. Penalties range from misdemeanors for minor unauthorized access up to 10-year felonies for serious fraud or destruction. Many computer crime cases also involve parallel federal charges under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, particularly when the alleged conduct crossed state lines or involved federal systems.
One of the most critical issues in these cases is intent. Michigan’s statutes require that access or conduct be “intentional” and “without authorization.” What constitutes authorization, especially in workplace or academic settings where the defendant had some level of legitimate access, is frequently a central dispute. Many computer crime prosecutions arise from situations where the scope of someone’s authorized access is genuinely ambiguous.
Defense Strategies
Authorization: If you had permission to access the system, network, or data, even informal permission, that is a fundamental challenge to the prosecution’s case. Employment agreements, IT policies, communications with supervisors, and the actual technical configuration of access controls are all relevant.
Lack of intent: Accidentally accessing files beyond your normal scope, or unknowingly viewing restricted data, does not satisfy the intentional element the statute requires.
Chain of custody and forensic integrity: Digital evidence must be collected, preserved, and analyzed according to strict forensic protocols. If the investigation was conducted improperly, the integrity of the evidence can be challenged.
Fourth Amendment: Searches of computers, phones, and digital accounts require a valid warrant supported by probable cause. Evidence obtained through an unlawful search can be suppressed.
Proportionality of charges: Prosecutors sometimes stack charges or allege the highest possible offense when the actual conduct was minor. Challenging overbroad charging decisions is often a productive defense strategy.
How Chris Approaches Computer Crime Cases
Chris works with qualified digital forensic experts to evaluate the technical evidence in computer crime cases. He scrutinizes how the investigation was conducted, whether search warrants were properly obtained and executed, and whether the prosecution’s characterization of the alleged conduct accurately reflects what the evidence actually shows. In Ann Arbor, where the University of Michigan’s network and student population generate a disproportionate number of these cases, Chris understands the local enforcement patterns and charging tendencies these cases tend to follow.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I be charged with computer crimes for accessing my own workplace accounts after being fired?
Yes. This is one of the most common computer crime scenarios. Once your employment ends, your authorization to access company systems typically ends with it. Logging into former employer accounts, even with credentials you previously used legitimately, can be charged as unauthorized access under Michigan law and potentially under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The specific facts of your situation and any communications about access rights matter a great deal to the defense.
What if I accessed a system I wasn’t supposed to but didn’t take or damage anything?
Unauthorized access itself is the offense under MCL 752.794, you don’t have to take data, cause damage, or profit in any way for charges to be filed. However, cases where nothing was taken or damaged are typically charged at the lower end of the penalty range, and the lack of harm is a meaningful factor at sentencing and in plea negotiations. The nature of the system accessed and your reason for accessing it also matter.
Could my case involve both state and federal charges?
Yes. When alleged computer crimes cross state lines, involve federal systems, or exceed certain damage thresholds, federal prosecutors can charge the same conduct under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030) in addition to state charges. Federal computer crime convictions carry their own penalties and can result in supervised release conditions that are particularly burdensome. Having an attorney who understands both state and federal exposure is important when the facts could trigger either jurisdiction.
How are computer crime cases handled in Washtenaw County?
Ann Arbor’s proximity to the University of Michigan means the 15th District Court and 22nd Circuit Court see more computer-related cases than most Michigan jurisdictions, including unauthorized access to university networks, cyberstalking, and cases involving student or faculty accounts. Chris knows the local charging tendencies and understands the technical and legal standards these cases require. He also knows when early negotiation is more productive than litigation and when the evidence actually supports a strong defense at trial.
Your first consultation is free and completely confidential. Call (734) 335-0810 or contact us online to speak directly with Chris.