Firearm allegations in Detroit can move quickly from an initial stop or search to felony charges with mandatory consequences. A careful defense starts with the basics: what the police claim they found, where it was located, and whether the investigation complied with Michigan and federal constitutional limits.

Many firearm cases turn on possession proof. Prosecutors may argue actual possession or constructive possession, and the defense often focuses on access, proximity, fingerprints, statements, and whether others had equal opportunity to control the item. Where the facts are thin, the best leverage is often early motion practice and disciplined cross-examination.

Charging decisions also matter. Michigan firearm statutes cover different conduct, and penalties vary sharply depending on prior record, licensing status, and the presence of an alleged predicate offense. Identifying overcharging, unsupported enhancements, and missing elements helps narrow the case and build a defensible trial posture.

Because firearm evidence commonly comes from traffic stops, home searches, or warrant executions, suppression issues are frequently decisive. When probable cause, warrant scope, or search incident-to-arrest limits are violated, exclusion of the firearm can change the entire outcome. A defense plan should be built early, with the record preserved for negotiation and litigation.

Felon-in-Possession: Eligibility, Proof, and Suppression Issues

In Michigan, firearm cases are often decided in the first weeks of the prosecution, long before trial.

The initial documents matter because they frame the alleged elements and determine whether the case proceeds as a misdemeanor in district court or a felony that can be bound over to circuit court.

Early review should focus on the factual basis for the stop, detention, and search, and on whether the prosecution can connect the accused to the firearm through admissible evidence rather than assumption.

For charging, the controlling statutes are central to both negotiation and litigation.

MCL 750.224f is commonly implicated.

Related provisions may also apply, including MCL 28.424.

Felon-in-possession cases frequently hinge on the status of the prior conviction and whether the prosecution can prove the person was still prohibited at the time of the alleged possession.

Defense counsel should verify the conviction category, the date of completion of sentence, and any rights-restoration issues.

Independent of that inquiry, the most effective challenges often target the stop or search that produced the firearm and the reliability of any admissions attributed to the accused.

Michigan appellate decisions repeatedly emphasize that possession may be proven by circumstantial evidence, but it must still be evidence that supports a finding of control beyond speculation.

Practitioners frequently litigate possession concepts through cases discussing constructive possession and the sufficiency of proof, such as People v.

Hayden and decisions applying the felony-firearm statute, including People v.

Muhammad and related analyses in People v.

Visner (unpublished).

A practical defense sequence is to test the legality of the police conduct, then test the admissibility and sufficiency of possession proof, and finally evaluate sentencing exposure if a conviction occurred.

In many cases, targeted suppression motions and careful preliminary examination strategy can narrow the charge set, improve negotiation leverage, or position the case for trial with a focused theory.

Why Choose William Maze As Your Criminal Defense Attorney?

As a Detroit criminal defense attorney, I provide specialized expertise in Detroit's court systems. I understand the specific procedures, judges, and prosecutors in Detroit courts, giving my clients a distinct advantage in their criminal defense cases.

Local Expertise:

• Knowledge of Detroit judges' preferences
• Experience with Detroit prosecutors
• Understanding of local court procedures
• Relationships with court personnel

Attorney Credentials:

• 28+ years Detroit experience
• Expert witness qualified
• Former CDAM President
• SFST certified instructor

William J. Maze, Esq.

Detroit Criminal Defense Attorney

Expert Witness 28+ Years