Michigan Romeo and Juliet Law: Age of Consent, Close-in-Age Rules, and Penalties

Overview

Michigan places its close-in-age relief somewhere unusual: not in the offense, and not in a defense provision, but in the sex offender registration act.

The criminal code offers almost nothing. Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree — sexual penetration with a person aged 13 to 15 — contains no age-gap element at all. A seventeen-year-old and a fifteen-year-old are within it on identical terms as a forty-year-old and a fifteen-year-old. The offense carries up to fifteen years.

The relief arrives afterward. Michigan's SORA contains a close-in-age provision, commonly called the Romeo and Juliet exception, exempting certain people from registration where the victim was 13 to 15 and the offender was not more than four years older. There is also a petition route for people already registered who meet the criteria.

The consequence is a system that is harsh at the front end and considerably more forgiving at the back. A young defendant in Michigan generally cannot avoid the conviction on close-in-age grounds — but may be able to avoid the registry, which for many families is the consequence that actually shapes a life.

Michigan's registry has also been through more constitutional upheaval than almost any other state's, culminating in a legislative rewrite. Anything written about Michigan SORA before that rewrite should be treated with suspicion.

1. Does Michigan Have a Romeo and Juliet Law?

Yes, but it is in the registration statute rather than the criminal code, and that placement changes what it can do. Michigan's Sex Offender Registration Act, MCL 28.721 et seq., contains a close-in-age exception excluding certain individuals from the registration requirement where the victim was at least 13 and under 16 and the offender was not more than four years older. There is also a petition mechanism allowing certain people already on the registry to seek removal where they satisfy the criteria, which makes it worth investigating for older convictions and not only for pending cases. Two limits matter. It does not prevent the conviction — a CSC third degree conviction is still a conviction, still a felony, and still carries the sentence the court imposes; the exception addresses registration alone. And eligibility is defined by statute and is not automatic: criteria, exclusions, and the petition process are specified, and relief generally requires meeting all of them. The structure is worth comparing with Florida's § 943.04354, which works the same way — conviction stands, registration relief available on petition. Both states decided that the right place for close-in-age mercy was the collateral consequence rather than the criminal liability.

2. Age of Consent in Michigan

Sixteen. Michigan's offenses are organized as four degrees of criminal sexual conduct, distinguished by whether the conduct involved penetration or contact and by the surrounding circumstances. CSC first degree (MCL 750.520b) covers sexual penetration where the other person is under 13, or where the other person is 13 to 15 and the actor is a member of the same household, related by blood or affinity to the fourth degree, or in a position of authority used to coerce submission; it is punishable by life or any term of years, with a 25-year mandatory minimum where the victim is under 13 and the actor is 17 or older. CSC second degree (MCL 750.520c) covers sexual contact under the same circumstances, up to 15 years. CSC third degree (MCL 750.520d) covers sexual penetration where the other person is 13 to 15, with no age-gap requirement, up to 15 years. CSC fourth degree (MCL 750.520e) covers sexual contact where the other person is 13 to 15 and the actor is five or more years older, up to 2 years. Note the asymmetry between the third and fourth degrees: for contact, Michigan requires a five-year gap; for penetration, it requires nothing. The more serious conduct carries the less demanding element.

3. Close-in-Age Exception Explained

Because the relief sits in SORA rather than the criminal code, it operates after conviction rather than as a bar to it. The exception excludes certain individuals from the registration requirement where the victim was at least 13 and under 16 and the offender was not more than four years older, and a petition mechanism allows certain people already registered to seek removal on the same criteria. What it cannot do is stop the prosecution, reduce the charge, or shorten the sentence. For a young Michigan defendant the realistic objective is therefore not acquittal on close-in-age grounds but a disposition that qualifies for the exception — a negotiation and charging objective rather than a trial defense.

4. Legal Age Gap Rules

Michigan uses two different gap figures for two different purposes, and neither behaves the way a conventional exemption would. In the criminal code, the only gap element is in CSC fourth degree, which requires the actor to be five or more years older for sexual contact with a 13- to 15-year-old; CSC third degree, covering penetration with the same age band, requires no gap at all. In SORA, the relevant figure is four years — the offender must not be more than four years older for the registration exception to apply. So a nineteen-year-old with a fifteen-year-old is convicted under CSC third degree regardless of the gap, but may qualify for registry relief, while a twenty-year-old with a fifteen-year-old exceeds the four-year criterion and does not.

Michigan's SORA Upheaval

This is important context for anyone researching Michigan, because a great deal of published material is out of date.

Michigan's registration act was challenged in federal court, and the Sixth Circuit held that Michigan's scheme — with its geographic exclusion zones, retroactive expansions, and reporting burdens — had become punitive in effect, so that applying it retroactively violated the Ex Post Facto Clause. The Michigan Supreme Court subsequently reached a comparable conclusion under state law.

Those rulings forced Michigan to rewrite SORA, which the legislature did in 2021. The current statute differs from its predecessor in the scope of restrictions and in how obligations apply to people whose offenses predate various amendments.

Two practical consequences: older summaries of Michigan registration are unreliable, and the school safety zone provisions in particular were substantially changed. The date of the offense can also matter to what obligations apply — that is fact-specific and belongs with counsel.

Mistake of Age

Michigan does not provide a general reasonable-belief defense for these offenses. Michigan courts have treated the age element as strict liability, and a defendant's belief about the other person's age does not defeat it.

Marriage

Michigan has restricted minor marriage, raising the minimum age and eliminating the routes that previously permitted marriage at younger ages. Older material describing Michigan as permitting marriage with parental consent at 16 should be checked against current law.

5. What Is Not Protected?

Because the criminal code contains almost no close-in-age element, the list of what goes uncovered is long.

• CSC third degree itself. No gap element exists, and no defense fills the space.
• The household, relationship, and authority prongs. These elevate conduct to CSC first or second degree regardless of the age gap.
• Anyone under 13. No allowance, and a 25-year mandatory minimum for actors 17 and older.
• Explicit images. Michigan's child sexually abusive activity and material provisions use 18 as the threshold with no close-in-age accommodation. Two Michigan sixteen-year-olds — both at the age of consent — face felony exposure for producing or exchanging images, and neither the SORA exception nor anything in the criminal code helps.
• Force or incapacity. These elevate the degree independently of age.
• Conduct in another state or in Canada. Michigan borders Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin, and shares an international border with Ontario at Detroit, Port Huron, and Sault Ste. Marie. Wisconsin uses 18; Ohio and Indiana use 16 with different structures. Canadian federal law applies across the bridge and tunnel crossings. Travel for sexual activity with a minor can trigger 18 U.S.C. § 2423, which reaches foreign as well as interstate travel, and electronic communication can trigger 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) with its ten-year mandatory minimum.

6. Examples

7. Possible Penalties

Michigan also imposes lifetime electronic monitoring in defined circumstances, particularly for CSC first and second degree convictions involving young victims. This obligation is separate from registration and separate from the sentence, and it is easy to overlook in plea discussions. Ask about it directly.

8. Sex Offender Registration Risk

Michigan registers under MCL 28.721 et seq., the Sex Offenders Registration Act, and this is where Michigan's close-in-age relief actually lives — an exception excluding certain individuals from registration where the victim was 13 to 15 and the offender was not more than four years older, plus a petition mechanism for people already registered who meet the criteria. Michigan's registry has been through more constitutional upheaval than almost any other state's. The Sixth Circuit held that Michigan's scheme had become punitive in effect and could not be applied retroactively, and the Michigan Supreme Court reached a comparable conclusion under state law. Those rulings forced the legislature to rewrite SORA in 2021, changing the scope of restrictions — the school safety zone provisions in particular — and how obligations apply to people whose offenses predate various amendments. The practical consequences are that older summaries of Michigan registration are unreliable, and that the date of the offense can matter to what obligations apply.

Statutes of Limitation

Michigan has eliminated the limitation period for CSC first degree and substantially extended it for other degrees, in several instances tying the period to the victim's adulthood or to the identification of a suspect through DNA. Which rule applies depends on the offense and on when the conduct occurred.

9. Official Statute Sources

Primary Michigan statutes and official government resources cited in this guide. Look each citation up on your state legislature's official website for the current text:

• Michigan Compiled Laws — Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree
  MCL § 750.520b
• Michigan Compiled Laws — Criminal sexual conduct in the second degree
  MCL § 750.520c
• Michigan Compiled Laws — Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree
  MCL § 750.520d
• Michigan Compiled Laws — Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree
  MCL § 750.520e
• Michigan Compiled Laws — Sex Offenders Registration Act, including the close-in-age exception and petition provisions
  MCL § 28.721 et seq.
• Michigan Legislature — Official Michigan Compiled Laws
  Michigan Legislature
• U.S. Department of Justice — Citizen's Guide to U.S. Federal Law on the Sexual Abuse of Minors
  U.S. Dept. of Justice, Criminal Division

10. When to Talk to a Lawyer

Before speaking with police or Children's Protective Services investigators, including in conversations framed as routine. Michigan presents a specific structural reality worth naming. Because CSC third degree has no age-gap element, a young defendant usually cannot argue their way out of the offense on close-in-age grounds. The realistic objectives are different: securing a disposition that qualifies for the SORA exception, avoiding the household and authority prongs that elevate the charge to CSC first degree, and avoiding lifetime electronic monitoring. Those are all negotiation and charging objectives rather than trial defenses, and they are shaped early. If you have an older Michigan conviction that might satisfy the four-year criteria, the SORA petition route makes it worth having someone review the file — particularly given how much the statute has changed.