WeVote
Log In

Bill

ED

Bill

HB 4174

Juveniles: other; presumption of admissibility for a juvenile's self-incriminating responses obtained through deceptive police practices; modify. Amends sec. 1, ch. XIIA of 1939 PA 288 (MCL 712A.1) & adds sec. 17e to ch. XIIA.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Emily Dievendorf and 9 co-sponsors

Michigan HB 4174 adds Sec. 17e on deceptive police questioning of juveniles and admissibility of self-incriminating statements, plus updated definitions in the juvenile code.

bill electronically reproduced 03/06/2025
#juveniles:other #lawenforcement:investigations
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 4174

Summary — HB 4174 (2025) — Juvenile Statements and Deceptive Police Practices

Note: The provided source document contained text from two different bills both labeled HB 4174 (an Illinois museum-content bill and a Michigan juvenile bill). This summary focuses on the Michigan measure described as amending chapter XIIA of the 1939 Probate Code (MCL 712A.1) and adding section 17e, which concerns juvenile statements obtained through deceptive police practices.

Main purpose

HB 4174 would amend Michigan’s juvenile code (chapter XIIA of the Probate Code) by (1) updating definitions in MCL 712A.1 (chapter XIIA, sec. 1) and (2) adding a new section 17e that addresses interactions between juveniles and law enforcement regarding deceptive practices and the admissibility of juveniles’ self‑incriminating responses.

Key provisions (based on available text)

  • Amends section 1 of chapter XIIA to revise and expand statutory definitions used throughout the juvenile chapter.
  • Adds a definition of “deception”: knowingly using conduct or written, oral, electronic, nonverbal, or other communication to (a) communicate a false fact about evidence, (b) misrepresent the accuracy of a fact, or (c) communicate an unauthorized statement about leniency or another false promise.
  • Adds new Section 17e (text truncated in the source): the provision begins by addressing situations where a law enforcement officer, court official, or an agent uses deception in questioning a juvenile. Although the full text of Sec. 17e is not present, the bill’s title and language indicate it creates rules regarding the admissibility (a presumption of admissibility is indicated in the bill title) of juveniles’ self‑incriminating responses obtained through deceptive practices.
  • Other existing provisions of chapter XIIA (preservation of least restrictive placements, competency standards, etc.) remain in force; the bill explicitly situates the change within the juvenile (non‑criminal) proceeding framework.

Who would be affected

  • Juveniles who are the subjects of delinquency petitions (persons under 17 or under 18 depending on the statutory date thresholds in the chapter).
  • Law enforcement officers, court personnel, and agents who question juveniles.
  • Juvenile defense attorneys and prosecutors, and juvenile courts that would determine admissibility of statements.
  • Families, guardians, and institutions involved in juvenile proceedings.

Potential impacts and issues

  • If Sec. 17e creates or strengthens a presumption that statements obtained via deceptive practices are admissible, it could increase the use of such statements in juvenile adjudications. Given research on juveniles’ vulnerability to coercion and false confessions, this change could raise concerns about reliability and due process.
  • Conversely, if the section restricts admissibility or requires specific safeguards (the full text is needed to confirm), it could increase protections for juveniles during custodial questioning.
  • The bill’s definition of “deception” provides a statutory baseline for courts to analyze police conduct.

Legislative status and timeline

  • Introduced: March 10, 2025 (filed March 6, 2025; read first time March 31, 2025).
  • Referred to Committee on Judiciary (March 6, 2025).
  • Committee activity: reported favorably without amendment (public hearing May 1, 2025; committee report filed May 8, 2025).
  • Placed on General State Calendar and read a second time May 14, 2025; subsequently postponed.
  • Sponsor(s) listed in the file: Rep. Dylan Wegela (introducer) and Rep. Kimberly Du Buclet appears in the mixed document as primary sponsor on unrelated text; the Michigan bill record shows introduction and committee referral as noted above.
  • Companion: SB 2515.

Notes / Next steps

  • The source truncates Sec. 17e; the precise legal effects (e.g., whether the statute creates a rebuttable presumption of admissibility, what standards courts must apply, or what Miranda‑type warnings or safeguards are required) cannot be confirmed from the available excerpt. Reviewing the full text of Sec. 17e as introduced or substituted is necessary to determine the exact legal standard and procedural requirements.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.