Embezzlement charges arrive differently from most criminal cases. There is no arrest at the scene, no traffic stop, no 911 call. There is an internal audit, a meeting with HR, a suspension, and then weeks or months of silence before a detective calls.
That gap is the most important period in the entire case, and most people spend it doing exactly the wrong things.
The Statute
MCL 750.174 makes it an offense for a person in a position of trust — an agent, servant, employee, trustee, or public officer — to fraudulently dispose of or convert money or property belonging to their principal or employer.
Charges are tiered by value:
- Under $200 — 93-day misdemeanor,
- $200 to $999 — one-year misdemeanor,
- $1,000 to $19,999 — five-year felony, fine up to $10,000 or three times the value,
- $20,000 to $49,999 — 10-year felony, fine up to $15,000 or three times the value,
- $50,000 to $99,999 — 15-year felony,
- $100,000 or more — 20-year felony, fine up to $50,000 or three times the value.
Enhanced penalties apply where the victim is a vulnerable adult or a nonprofit or charitable organization.
Aggregation Is Everything
This is what turns a misdemeanor into a felony in these cases.
Michigan permits the prosecution to aggregate the value of multiple transactions occurring over a 12-month period into a single charge. A person accused of taking $80 a week for a year is not facing 52 misdemeanors. They are facing one five-year felony for approximately $4,000.
Extend that pattern over three years and the exposure moves into the 10- and 15-year tiers.
Because the entire charge level depends on the aggregate number, contesting the calculation is frequently the single most valuable thing a defense attorney does. Employer loss figures are routinely inflated, frequently include amounts that were never actually taken, and often bundle in disputed expenses, accounting errors, and inventory shrinkage that has nothing to do with the defendant.
Related Charges
- Larceny by conversion (MCL 750.362) — where property was lawfully obtained and then converted.
- Uttering and publishing (MCL 750.249) — a 14-year felony for passing a forged instrument. Frequently charged alongside embezzlement in check cases.
- Forgery (MCL 750.248) — a 14-year felony.
- Using a computer to commit a crime (MCL 752.796) — a separate felony that attaches to essentially any modern financial offense, since the conduct occurred in software.
- Identity theft (MCL 445.65) — felony.
- Racketeering (MCL 750.159i) — in large or organized cases, a 20-year felony.
- Federal charges — wire fraud, mail fraud, or bank fraud where interstate systems were used, carrying substantially higher exposure.
The stacking is what makes these cases dangerous. A single course of conduct can support four or five charges.
The Internal Investigation Is the Trap
Here is how the overwhelming majority of these cases are actually built.
An employer discovers a discrepancy. They pull records, run an audit, and then call the employee into a meeting — often with HR, sometimes with an outside investigator or a loss prevention firm.
In that meeting, the employee is told some version of: “We just want to understand what happened. If you're honest with us, we can handle this internally.”
What follows is a written statement, sometimes a signed acknowledgment, sometimes a repayment agreement. The employee believes they have resolved it.
That statement goes to the police. It is the case.
Critical points:
- Your employer is not law enforcement, so Miranda does not apply. Nobody has to advise you of anything.
- A private employer's promise not to prosecute is generally not binding on the prosecutor.
- Signing a repayment agreement is frequently characterized as an admission.
- You are not required to participate in an internal investigation. You may be fired for refusing — and being fired is survivable in a way a felony conviction is not.
If you are called into that meeting: you can decline to give a statement, ask to have counsel present, and say nothing further. That decision, made in five seconds, is worth more than everything a lawyer can do afterward.
Defenses That Work
Lack of intent
Embezzlement requires fraudulent intent. Genuine bookkeeping errors, misunderstood authorization, sloppy record-keeping, and honest mistakes are not crimes. In small businesses with informal practices, the line between authorized and unauthorized is frequently unwritten and genuinely unclear.
Authorization
Was the conduct permitted, expressly or by practice? Owners who verbally approved expenses, longstanding informal arrangements, and compensation disputes all fall here. Employers frequently forget or deny approvals they actually gave.
Claim of right
A good-faith belief in entitlement — unpaid wages, earned commissions, reimbursable expenses — negates fraudulent intent.
Value
As discussed, the aggregate figure drives everything. Forensic review of the employer's own records frequently produces a materially lower number, and moving from one tier to another changes the entire case.
Identification
Shared logins, shared registers, shared safe access, and multiple employees with the same permissions make attribution genuinely contestable. Employers often assume the person they suspect is the person responsible and then build the file to match.
Statute of limitations
Most Michigan felonies carry a six-year limitations period under MCL 767.24. Older conduct within an aggregated total may be time-barred.
Restitution
Michigan requires restitution to crime victims. In embezzlement cases it is frequently the dominant practical issue — larger than any fine and longer-lasting than any probation term.
Key points:
- The amount must be supported by evidence, not merely asserted by the employer,
- It is contestable at a restitution hearing,
- It becomes enforceable as a civil judgment,
- It survives probation and, in most circumstances, bankruptcy.
Restitution figures presented by employers are routinely inflated. They should be examined line by line.
The Civil Case
Employers frequently pursue a civil suit in parallel, and Michigan permits treble damages in certain conversion actions. Anything said in the criminal case can be used in the civil one, and vice versa. The two need to be handled with awareness of each other.
Paths That Avoid a Conviction
- Pre-charge resolution. The most valuable outcome. Before charges are authorized, counsel can present context, dispute the loss figure, and sometimes negotiate a civil resolution that forecloses prosecution.
- HYTA (MCL 762.11) for defendants 17 to 25 — dismissal without public record.
- Delayed sentencing (MCL 771.1) — up to a year, with dismissal or reduction on compliance, frequently used where full restitution is paid.
- Charge reduction to a lower tier based on a corrected valuation.
Why This Conviction Is Especially Damaging
Embezzlement is a crime of dishonesty, and that classification does more damage than the sentence:
- It can be used to impeach your credibility in any future testimony,
- It is disqualifying for essentially any position involving money, inventory, or fiduciary responsibility,
- Professional licensing in accounting, law, healthcare, insurance, real estate, and financial services is severely affected,
- Bonding becomes unavailable, which forecloses entire categories of employment,
- It is a crime involving moral turpitude with serious immigration consequences,
- Security clearances are lost.
For a career professional, this is frequently a career-ending conviction regardless of the sentence imposed.
What to Do Right Now
- Stop talking. To HR, to your manager, to coworkers, to the investigator, to the detective.
- Do not sign anything — statements, acknowledgments, repayment agreements.
- Do not repay anything without legal advice. It is frequently treated as an admission.
- Do not delete emails, texts, or files. That supports obstruction charges and is recoverable anyway.
- Preserve your records — pay stubs, approvals, emails authorizing expenses, text messages with supervisors.
- Do not access company systems after being suspended. That can generate separate computer crime charges.
- Get counsel before the police call. The pre-charge window is where these cases are won.
Where These Cases Are Heard
Felony embezzlement arising in Plymouth, Plymouth Township, Canton, and Northville begins with arraignment in the 35th District Court in Plymouth, proceeds through probable cause conference and preliminary examination, and binds over to Wayne County Circuit Court. Misdemeanor cases resolve in district court. Federal charges go to the Eastern District of Michigan.
The Meeting Is the Case
Almost every embezzlement prosecution in Wayne County rests on a statement the defendant gave voluntarily, in a conference room, before anyone told them they were facing a felony.
If your employer has raised questions about money, call Boria Law at (734) 453-7806 before that meeting — not after. Attorney Aaron J. Boria handles workplace theft and financial crime cases throughout Wayne County, and the pre-charge period is where the real work happens.
Share:
Michigan Sobriety Court: How Repeat OWI Offenders Get Their License Back
Michigan Restitution: How Courts Calculate What You Owe and How to Fight It