Introduction

Michigan law provides a unique safeguard for individuals accused of certain sexual offenses. Under MCL 776.21(5), a person alleged to have committed a Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) offense has the right to request a polygraph examination. While polygraph results are rarely admissible as evidence in trial proceedings, this statutory right plays an important role in the defense process, offering defendants an opportunity to support their credibility and challenge the accusations against them.

What the Law Says

The relevant statute, Michigan Compiled Laws § 776.21(5), states that when an individual is alleged to have committed one of the designated CSC offenses—including CSC in the first, second, third, or fourth degree or assault with intent to commit CSC—the defendant must be given a polygraph test if they request it.

This right exists regardless of whether the prosecution or police believe the examination is necessary. Importantly, the law uses the word “alleged,” meaning that the right applies before conviction and during the pre-trial stage, when the accused is still presumed innocent.

Purpose of the Statutory Right

Although polygraph examinations are controversial in terms of scientific reliability, Michigan lawmakers recognized their potential value for defendants facing particularly serious charges. The right ensures that:

• Defendants have access to a potential tool that may support their credibility when accusations rest heavily on one person’s word against another’s.

• Law enforcement and prosecutors are held accountable by providing defendants with an opportunity to request testing, preventing unilateral control over polygraph access.

• The defense process is more balanced, particularly in CSC cases where physical evidence may be limited or absent.

Limits on Admissibility

One of the most important limitations is that polygraph results are not generally admissible in court to prove guilt or innocence. Michigan courts, like most jurisdictions, view polygraph evidence with skepticism due to concerns about accuracy, examiner bias, and the possibility of countermeasures.

However, the examination can still have strategic uses:

• Influencing charging decisions: Prosecutors may reconsider pursuing charges if a defendant successfully passes a polygraph.

• Plea negotiations: Defense attorneys may use the results in discussions with prosecutors, even if they cannot present them to a jury.

• Pre-trial motions: In certain circumstances, polygraph evidence may become relevant in motions concerning admissibility, new trials, or other procedural issues.

Conditions and Procedures

To exercise this right effectively, defendants and their attorneys must follow procedural requirements:

1. Timely request: The polygraph must be requested promptly, usually during the pre-trial stage. Once a conviction is entered, the right no longer applies.

2. Waivers and logistics: Defendants may be required to complete forms or waivers and comply with scheduling set by law enforcement or the courts.

3. Qualified examiners: Tests are typically conducted by examiners approved by law enforcement or the state, rather than private providers alone.

Failure to provide the examination upon request can form the basis of an appeal or other post-conviction relief.

Case Law Examples

Michigan appellate courts have addressed this issue multiple times. For example:

• In People v. Phillips (2007), the Michigan Court of Appeals emphasized that the right applies to defendants when they are still in the “alleged” stage of prosecution. Once convicted, the statutory right is no longer available.

• Other cases have clarified that denial of a requested polygraph may justify remedies such as suppression of evidence or consideration in appellate review.

These cases illustrate how courts enforce the statute and protect defendants’ access to polygraph testing when properly requested.

Conclusion

Michigan’s statutory right to a polygraph examination under MCL 776.21(5) is a powerful, though often misunderstood, element of the state’s criminal justice system. While polygraph results themselves are rarely admissible in trial, the existence of this right provides defendants accused of serious sexual offenses with an important procedural safeguard. It ensures they can request and obtain a test, potentially influencing charging decisions, plea negotiations, and other stages of the legal process.

For anyone facing allegations of CSC in Michigan, understanding this right—and consulting with a qualified attorney about how and when to use it—can be a critical step in mounting a defense.

📚 Helpful Resources

Explore trusted resources for understanding Michigan’s statutory right to a polygraph exam under MCL 776.21(5), including official legal texts, court cases, and research bodies.

• ⚖️
  Michigan Compiled Laws § 776.21(5)
  – Full statute from the official Michigan Legislature site.
• 📖
  Michigan Judicial Institute – Sexual Assault Benchbook
  – Guidance for judges on polygraph use in CSC cases.
• 🏛️
  People v. Phillips (2007)
  – Key Michigan Supreme Court decision on when the right applies.
• 🔍
  Casemine Database
  – Collection of appellate cases interpreting MCL 776.21(5).
• 🌐
  American Polygraph Association
  – Professional standards, ethics, and scientific guidelines.
• 🧪
  National Institute of Justice – Polygraph Research
  – Federal research on polygraph accuracy and limitations.

Defendants and their attorneys in Michigan should also be aware that private services are available if they wish to explore additional options beyond state-administered exams. Scheduling a confidential polygraph test through accredited providers can offer insights and preparation that may assist in legal strategy. While results from privately arranged examinations are generally not admissible in court, they can be valuable in plea negotiations, charging reviews, or simply in providing peace of mind during the defense process.