Felony Reckless Driving and Causation Defenses

Beginning October 31, 2010, Michigan makes it a felony when a person operates a vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for safety and, by that operation, causes serious impairment of a body function to another person. MCL 257.626(3). The Michigan Judicial Institute notes that the offense is tied to specific criminal jury instructions and carries a penalty range of up to five years’ imprisonment, a fine range of $1,000 to $5,000, or both. See MCL 257.626(3).

Appellate decisions emphasize that the prosecution must prove reckless operation, not merely negligent maintenance or another non-operational cause. In People v Otto, the Court of Appeals explained that MCL 257.626 criminalizes the manner of operation rather than the decision to operate after poor maintenance, and that careless maintenance cannot substitute for proof of reckless operation. 348 Mich App 221, 233, 248 (2023).

When serious injury or death is alleged, causation analysis becomes essential. Otto also illustrates how a superseding mechanical failure can sever proximate causation for certain theories, even where factual causation is not disputed. Id. at 233–34, 249–51. The defense must therefore examine the chain of events, braking, visibility, roadway conditions, and whether any independent event broke the causal link between the defendant’s driving and the alleged impairment.

A strong defense integrates accident evidence, medical evidence, and legal elements. That approach creates leverage to challenge the felony charging theory, narrow disputed issues before trial, and pursue resolutions that reduce custody exposure and protect the driver’s license when legally available.

The “serious impairment” component can also be contested through medical proof and statutory definition. Defense counsel should obtain the complete medical records, diagnostic imaging, and functional assessments and should be prepared to litigate whether the alleged impairment meets the legal threshold. Even where injury is real, the question is whether the prosecutor can prove the statutory level beyond a reasonable doubt under the proper instruction. See M Crim JI 15.17.

Because felony exposure changes the stakes, early expert consultation is often warranted. Reconstruction and biomechanical analysis can address speed, braking, line of travel, and whether the injury mechanism is consistent with the prosecution’s theory. When the causation chain is weak, a focused pretrial strategy can lead to reductions or dismissals, or it can set the case for a defensible trial posture. See Otto, 348 Mich App at 249–51.

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