Private information on the Law Enforcement Information Network (LEIN)
A Macomb County sheriff’s deputy was charged with violation of the Michigan Law Enforcement Information Network (LEIN) because he improperly accessed the law enforcement information network.
The Prosecutor Can Charge Police Officers with Crimes
The Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office charged a Sergeant with violating the Michigan Law Enforcement Information Network (LEIN). LEIN is a statewide computerized information network that contains the criminal history of anyone who has been charged or convicted of a crime. Illegal access to LEIN
A 41B District Court judge arraigned Sheriff’s Sgt. David Willis in Macomb County. The judge gave him a $10,000 personal bond (a “personal bond” means that Sgt. Willis does not have to post money to be released). A violation of unauthorized or improper access to LEIN is a misdemeanor with a maximum possible sentence of 93 days in jail and a $500 fine. A police officer could use LEIN to find personal information or criminal history for use against someone in a lawsuit. Someone who discovered the alleged violation asked the Michigan State Police to investigate.
Still Employed as a Sheriff Despite Illegal Access to LEIN Charges
The disturbing thing about this story is that Sgt. Despite the Illegal Access to LEIN charge, David Willis is still working on active duty at the Macomb County Sheriff’s Department. Although we hope that the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” will be applied to Sgt. Willis, it is apparent that this constitutional principle is reserved only for Macomb County VIPs. Defendants in criminal cases are regularly presumed guilty by law enforcement, courts, judges, and prosecutors. The courts treat civilian defendants as second-class citizens. Prosecutors regularly assume that those merely charged with crimes are dangerous to the public or are deserving of excessive bond conditions.
Why did the Michigan State Police Charge Sgt. Willis with Illegal Access to LEIN?
The State Police have accused the deputy sheriff of violating a law designed to protect the public. In this particular case, Sgt. Willis is still employed and acting as a Sheriff’s Deputy, and the criminal justice system is treating one of its own with special rules. The prosecutor charged the deputy sheriff with violating a law designed to protect. Yet, it is apparent the prosecutor didn’t ask for a bond condition that the Sheriff should not have access to the LEIN network.
Defenses to Charges of Illegally Accessing the LEIN System
A charge involving the unauthorized use of Michigan’s Law Enforcement Information Network (LEIN) is serious and often leveled against individuals with professional access to sensitive law enforcement data, typically police officers, dispatchers, probation agents, or court employees. However, not every use that appears improper actually violates the law. These cases are nuanced, and several viable defenses may apply depending on the facts.
1. Lack of Criminal Intent
One of the most effective defenses centers on intent. Prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knowingly accessed LEIN for an unauthorized purpose. Mistakes, misunderstandings, or unclear directives from supervisors can lead to unintentional access. If the individual believed they were acting within the scope of their job or following an established protocol, the government’s burden to prove intent becomes significantly harder to meet.
2. Authorized Access Mischaracterized as Criminal
Not all access to LEIN that appears questionable is actually illegal. There are instances where access is later deemed improper due to internal policy violations or departmental miscommunication, but this doesn’t make it criminal. A violation of workplace policy may lead to discipline or termination, but does not necessarily amount to a crime. In many cases, the defense can show that the access was either explicitly authorized or was part of a routine practice that had never been addressed or corrected by leadership.
3. Inadequate Training or Ambiguous Guidelines
Departments often fail to provide clear, consistent training on LEIN usage rules. If an officer or staff member relied on vague guidance or was never properly trained, this can support a defense based on lack of notice or fair warning. Prosecuting someone under a statute they were never adequately trained on may raise constitutional concerns, particularly if the department applied an inconsistent policy.
4. Data Was Not Actually Accessed or Misused
Sometimes, an accusation of LEIN misuse stems from an audit that flags login activity without full context. Merely logging into LEIN or initiating a search does not prove that protected information was actually retrieved or misused. The defense can challenge the interpretation of system logs and demonstrate that no protected or confidential data was improperly obtained or disclosed.
5. Motive Not Connected to Personal Gain or Malice
Even if the prosecution can prove illegal access to LEIN occurred, they often attempt to paint the motive as personal, retaliatory, or otherwise malicious. In some cases, however, the access may have been motivated by concern for public safety, assisting another officer, or addressing a legitimate question, albeit through an informal or technically flawed method. Context matters, and a skilled defense lawyer can provide that context persuasively and credibly.
6. Constitutional Violations or Unlawful Investigation
The defense may file a motion to suppress evidence if the agency investigating the LEIN access violated the defendant’s rights during the investigation, such as conducting warrantless searches, interrogations without counsel, or using coerced statements. If the judge grants a motion to suppress, it would severely weaken the prosecution’s case.
These cases often depend on technical interpretations, training records, agency culture, and the defendant’s credibility. At trial, even subtle facts can sway the outcome. An experienced criminal defense attorney can investigate thoroughly, challenge assumptions, and ensure the judge or jury sees the full picture, not just the prosecution’s narrative.
Aggressive Defense for Misdemeanor and Felony Charges
Because the court system frequently mistreats defendants, it takes a fearless defense lawyer to stand up to prosecutors and judges who have lost sight of the Constitution’s protections. Retained and court-appointed lawyers who fail to stand up and fight to protect their clients’ rights contribute to the denial of due process. If the defense attorney is unwilling or unable to fight for their client, no one else will do it.
You want a lawyer who is more than willing to fight to protect his client and insists on doing everything possible to win. The Defense Team with LEWIS & DICKSTEIN, P.L.L.C., has a well-earned reputation for providing the highest caliber legal defense. Our attorneys will leave no stone unturned in our effort to protect and defend clients charged with misdemeanor and felony offenses in Michigan, including illegal access to LEIN.
Call us today at (248) 263-6800 for a free consultation or complete an online Request for Assistance Form. We will contact you promptly and find a way to help you.
We will find a way to help you.
We Are Not Afraid to Win!
