People v. Likine
Facts
Each defendant was charged under MCL 750.165 for failing to pay court-ordered child support. Likine was barred by a motion in limine from presenting evidence that her mental illness, disability, unemployment, and limited SSI income made payment impossible; she was convicted by a jury. Parks was convicted after a bench trial in which he complained about imputed income and disability-related limits on his medical practice but did not clearly assert impossibility. Harris pleaded guilty under a sentencing agreement, failed to satisfy the agreed payment conditions, and later argued that his health and indigency prevented payment.
Issue
Whether MCL 750.165, as interpreted in People v Adams to make inability to pay no defense, is constitutional, and specifically whether a defendant charged with felony nonsupport may present a defense based on inability to pay or impossibility. Also, as applied, whether each defendant was entitled to relief on that basis.
Rule
MCL 750.165 creates a strict-liability offense and does not recognize inability to pay, by itself, as a defense to felony nonsupport. But the common-law affirmative defense of impossibility remains available: a defendant must present prima facie evidence that he or she acted in good faith, made all reasonable efforts to comply with the support order, used all reasonably available lawful resources, and still could not comply through no fault of his or her own; if instructed, the defendant must prove impossibility by a preponderance of the evidence for each charged violation.
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
- The court's holding and reasoning
- Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
- 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Test yourself
Which is the strongest statement of the governing rule in Jordan's prosecution for felony nonsupport?