Legislative Analysis
Phone: (517) 373-8080
HATE CRIMES AND INSTITUTIONAL DESECRATION
http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa
House Bills 4474 (H-3) and 4476 (H-2) as passed by the House
Analysis available at
Sponsor: Rep. Noah Arbit http://www.legislature.mi.gov
House Bill 4475 (H-2) as passed by the House
Sponsor: Rep. Kristian Grant
House Bill 4477 (H-3) as passed by the House
Sponsor: Rep. Ranjeev Puri
Committee: Criminal Justice
Complete to 9-4-23
SUMMARY:
House Bills 4474 and 4476 would amend the Michigan Penal Code to revise provisions that
prohibit hate crimes and to define and prohibit institutional desecration, respectively. The bills
would provide for enhanced penalties based on factors such as prior convictions, allow a court
to impose alternative sentences under certain conditions, and respectively modify or allow for
a civil cause of action. House Bills 4475 and 4477 would make complementary changes to the
sentencing guidelines in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
House Bill 4474 would amend provisions of the code that now define and prohibit the crime
of ethnic intimidation.
Under current law, a person is guilty of ethnic intimidation if they maliciously do any of the
following with the specific intent to intimidate or harass another individual because of their
race, color, religion, gender, or national origin:
• Cause physical contact with the other individual.
• Damage, destroy, or deface any real or personal property of the other individual.
• Threaten, by word or act, to do either of the above, if there is reasonable cause to
believe that they will do so.
Ethnic intimidation is a felony punishable by imprisonment for up to two years or a fine of up
to $5,000, or both. The act also allows a person who suffers personal injury or property damage
as a result of ethnic intimidation to bring a civil cause of action against the offender for an
injunction, actual damages (including damages for emotional distress), or other appropriate
relief. The civil action can be brought regardless of the existence or outcome of any criminal
prosecution. A plaintiff prevailing in such an action can recover damages in the amount of
three times the actual damages or $2,000, whichever is greater, as well as reasonable attorney
fees and costs.
The bill would provide that a person is guilty of a hate crime if they maliciously and
intentionally do any of the following to another individual based in whole or in part on an
actual or perceived characteristic of that individual, regardless of the existence of any other
motivating factors:
• Use force or violence on the other individual.
• Cause bodily injury to the other individual.
House Fiscal Agency Page 1 of 7
 • Intimidate the other individual.
• Damage, destroy, or deface any real, personal, digital, or online property of the other
individual without that individual’s consent.
• Threaten, by word or act, to do any of the above.
Intimidate would mean a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing
harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel
terrorized, frightened, or threatened, and that actually causes the victim to feel
terrorized, frightened, or threatened. However, the term intimidate would not include
constitutionally protected activity or conduct that serves a legitimate purpose.
For purposes of the above provisions, an actual or perceived characteristic would include any
of the following:
• Race or color.
• Religion.
• Sex.
• Sexual orientation.
• Gender identity or expression.
• Physical or mental disability.
• Age.
• Ethnicity.
• National origin.
• Association or affiliation with an individual or group of individuals in whole or in part
based on a characteristic described above.
For both HB 4474 and HB 4476, gender identity or expression would mean having or
being perceived as having a gender-related self-identity or expression, whether or not
associated with an individual’s assigned sex at birth.
Penalties
Except as described under “Enhanced penalties,” below, a hate crime would be a felony
punishable by imprisonment for up to two years or a fine of up to $5,000, or both. Instead of
or in addition to those penalties, the court, if the defendant consents, could impose an
alternative sentence that may, if the entity chosen for community service is amenable, include
an order requiring the offender to complete a period of community service intended to enhance
the offender’s understanding of the impact of the offense upon the victim and the wider
community. In determining the suitability of an alternative sentence, the court would have to
consider the criminal history of the offender, the impact of the offense on the victim and the
wider community, the availability of the alternative sentence, and the nature of the violation.
Enhanced penalties
If any of the following apply, a person who commits a hate crime would be guilty of a felony
punishable by imprisonment for up to five years or a fine of up to $10,000, or both:
• The hate crime results in bodily injury.
• The person has one or more prior convictions 1 for hate crimes.
1
A prosecuting attorney intending to seek an enhanced sentence based on a defendant’s prior conviction would have
to include on the complaint and information a statement listing the prior conviction(s). The existence of the prior
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4474 to 4477 as passed by the House Page 2 of 7
 • A victim of the hate crime is less than 18 years of age and the offender is at least 19
years of age.
• The person commits the hate crime in concert with one or more other individuals.
• The person is in possession of a firearm during the commission of the hate crime.
If the defendant consents, the court could reduce any penalty described above by up to 20%
and impose an alternative sentence that may, if the entity chosen for community service is
amenable, include an order requiring the offender to complete a period of community service
intended to enhance the offender’s understanding of the impact of the offense upon the victim
and the wider community. In determining the suitability of an alternative sentence, the court
would have to consider the criminal history of the offender, the impact of the offense on the
victim and the wider community, the availability of the alternative sentence, and the nature of
the violation.
Civil cause of action
The bill would allow a person who suffers bodily injury or damage to their property as a result
of a hate crime to bring a civil cause of action against the offender for an injunction, actual
damages (including damages for emotional distress), or other appropriate relief. The civil
action could be brought regardless of the existence or outcome of any criminal prosecution. A
plaintiff prevailing in such an action could recover damages in the amount of three times the
actual damages or $25,000, whichever is greater, as well as reasonable attorney fees and costs.
MCL 750.147b
House Bill 4476 would add a new section to the Michigan Penal Code to provide that a person
who maliciously and intentionally destroys, damages, defaces, or vandalizes any of the
following, in whole or in part, or threatens by word or act to do so, because of the actual or
perceived race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, physical
or mental disability, age, ethnicity, or national origin of another individual or group of
individuals (regardless of the existence of any additional motivating factors) is guilty of
institutional desecration:
• A synagogue, mosque, church, temple, gurdwara, shrine, or other building, structure,
or place used for religious worship or other religious purpose.
• A cemetery, mortuary, or other facility used for the purpose of burial or memorializing
the dead.
• A school, educational facility, library, museum, community center, or campground.
• A business or charitable establishment, storefront, facility, office, or headquarters.
• The grounds adjacent to, and owned or rented by, any institution, facility, building,
structure, or place described above.
• The digital or online assets maintained, authored, rented, or owned by any institution,
facility, entity, or place described above.
• Any personal, communal, or institutional property contained in any institution, facility,
building, structure, or place described above.
convictions would be determined by the court, without a jury, at sentencing or a separate presentencing hearing. A
prior conviction could be established by any relevant evidence, such as a copy of the judgment of conviction; a
transcript of a prior trial, plea-taking, or sentencing; information in a presentence report; or the defendant’s statement.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4474 to 4477 as passed by the House Page 3 of 7
 Penalties
A person committing institutional desecration would be guilty of a crime, as shown in the table
below, based on the dollar amount of the destruction or injury and whether the person has prior
convictions for institutional desecration under either the section being added by the bill or a
local ordinance corresponding to that section.
Amount of Prior convictions 3 Offense and penalty
destruction or
injury 2
Less than $200 With no prior convictions Misdemeanor punishable by
imprisonment for up to 93 days or a
fine of up to the greater of three
times the amount of the destruction
or injury or $500, or both
imprisonment and a fine
Less than $200 With one or more prior Misdemeanor punishable by
convictions imprisonment for up to one year or a
fine of up to the greater of three
$200 or more but With no prior convictions times the amount of the destruction
less than $1,000 or injury or $2,000, or both
imprisonment and a fine
$200 or more but With one or more prior Felony punishable by imprisonment
less than $1,000 convictions where the amount for up to five years or a fine of up to
of the destruction or injury is the greater of three times the
$200 or greater amount of the destruction or injury
or $10,000, or both imprisonment
$1,000 or more With no prior convictions and a fine
but less than
$20,000
$1,000 or more but With two or more prior Felony punishable by imprisonment
less than $20,000 convictions where the amount for up to 10 years or a fine of up to
of the destruction or injury is the greater of three times the
$200 or greater amount of the destruction or injury
or $15,000, or both imprisonment
$20,000 or more Regardless of any prior and a fine
convictions
2
The amounts of the destruction or injury in separate incidents under a scheme or course of conduct in any 12-month
period could be aggregated to determine the total amount of the destruction or injury.
3
A prosecuting attorney intending to seek an enhanced sentence based on a defendant’s prior conviction would have
to include on the complaint and information a statement listing the prior conviction(s). The existence of the prior
convictions would be determined by the court, without a jury, at sentencing or a separate presentencing hearing. A
prior conviction could be established by any relevant evidence, such as a copy of the judgment of conviction; a
transcript of a prior trial, plea-taking, or sentencing; information in a presentence report; or the defendant’s statement.
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4474 to 4477 as passed by the House Page 4 of 7
 Alternative sentence
For misdemeanor offenses, instead of or in addition to the above penalties, the court could, if
the defendant consents, impose an alternative sentence that may, if the entity chosen for
community service is amenable, include an order requiring the offender to complete a period
of community service intended to enhance the offender’s understanding of the impact of the
offense on the victim and the wider community. In determining the suitability of an alternative
sentence, the court would have to consider the criminal history of the offender, the impact of
the offense on the victim and the wider community, the availability of the alternative sentence,
and the nature of the violation.
For felony offenses, the court could, if the defendant consents, reduce any penalty imposed as
described above by up to 20% and impose an alternative sentence that may, if the entity chosen
for community service is amenable, include an order requiring the offender to complete a
period of community service intended to enhance the offender’s understanding of the impact
of the offense on the victim and the wider community. In determining the suitability of an
alternative sentence, the court would have to consider the criminal history of the offender, the
impact of the offense on the victim and the wider community, the availability of the alternative
sentence, and the nature of the violation.
Civil cause of action
The bill would allow an entity or institution that suffers damage or destruction to property to
bring a civil cause of action against the offender for an injunction, actual damages (including
damages for infliction of mental injury or emotional distress), or other appropriate relief. The
civil action could be brought regardless of the existence or outcome of any criminal
prosecution. A plaintiff prevailing in such an action could recover damages in the amount of
three times the actual damages or $25,000, whichever is greater, as well as reasonable attorney
fees and costs.
Proposed MCL 750.147c
House Bills 4475 and 4477 would, taken together, amend the sentencing guidelines provisions
of the Code of Criminal Procedure to provide the following:
• A hate crime is a class G crime against a person with a statutory maximum term of
imprisonment of two years. (These are the classification and statutory maximum that
now pertain to the felony of ethnic intimidation, which the bills would remove.)
• A hate crime with aggravating factors is a class E crime against a person with a
statutory maximum of five years’ imprisonment.
• Institutional desecration involving $1,000 to $20,000 or with prior convictions is a
class E crime against property with a statutory maximum term of imprisonment of five
years.
• Institutional desecration involving $20,000 or more or with prior convictions is a class
D crime against property with a statutory maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years.
House Bill 4475 could not take effect unless HBs 4474 and 4476 were both also enacted. (It
includes the felonies from both those bills.) House Bill 4477 could not take effect unless HB
4476 were also enacted. (It includes the felonies from only that bill.)
MCL 777.16g
House Fiscal Agency HBs 4474 to 4477 as passed by the House Page 5 of 7
FISCAL IMPACT:
House Bill 4474 would have an indeterminate fiscal impact on the state and on local units of
government. Expanded provisions that define and prohibit hate crimes, and expanded penalties,
are likely to result in an increase in the number of convictions. Violations would be felonies,
and new felony convictions would result in increased costs related to state prisons and state
probation supervision. In fiscal year 2022, the average cost of