Michigan House Bill 5105 proposes new marijuana penalties and possession limits to combat illicit cannabis operations.
Michigan’s Cannabis Laws
Since Michigan legalized recreational marijuana in 2018, the state has worked to balance personal freedom with public safety. However, large-scale illegal grow operations and unregulated cannabis distribution continue to challenge law enforcement and the Cannabis Regulatory Agency (CRA). In response, lawmakers introduced a series of bills in October 2025 to tighten regulations and redefine penalties.
One of the most prominent proposals is House Bill 5105, introduced on October 22, 2025, by Rep. Pauline Wendzel and others. The bill aims to amend Section 7401 of the Michigan Public Health Code (MCL 333.7401) to update criminal penalties for marijuana-related offenses based on quantity and intent
What HB 5105 Proposes
HB 5105 seeks to distinguish between personal use and large-scale illegal operations by setting clear thresholds for marijuana possession and manufacturing. The bill introduces tiered penalties based on weight, plant count, and concentrate volume.
For example, possessing 10 to 25 kilograms of marijuana or 50 to 100 plants would result in a misdemeanor, while quantities exceeding 250 kilograms or 1,000 plants could lead to felony charges with up to 10 years in prison.
The bill also addresses marijuana concentrates, which have grown in popularity. Possession of 1 to 2.5 kilograms of concentrate would be treated as a misdemeanor, while more than 10 kilograms could trigger felony charges. These changes aim to give law enforcement clearer guidelines and help the CRA target large-scale illicit operations more effectively
Don’t worry the bill is tie-barred to House Bill 5107
How HB 5105 and HB 5107 Work Together
- HB 5105 amends the Michigan Public Health Code (MCL 333.7401) to redefine criminal penalties for marijuana-related offenses. It introduces tiered penalties based on the amount of marijuana or concentrate possessed or manufactured.
- HB 5107 amends the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MCL 333.27955 and MCL 333.27965) to modify the allowable amounts of marijuana for personal use and possession.
Because HB 5105 sets penalties and HB 5107 sets the legal possession limits, the two bills are interdependent. For example, if HB 5107 changes the legal threshold for personal possession, HB 5105 must reflect those changes in its penalty structure. The tie-bar ensures that enforcement and legal standards remain aligned.
You can read the full bill texts here:
What Does “Tie-Barred” Mean?
In Michigan legislative terms, a tie-bar means that one bill is legally connected to another. If two bills are tie-barred, they must both be passed for either to take effect. This ensures that related legal changes are implemented together, maintaining consistency across statutes.
Key Details of HB 5105
-
Introduced: October 22, 2025
-
Sponsors: Reps. Wendzel, Aragona, Borton, Fairbairn, Wozniak, Neyer
-
Committee: Regulatory Reform
-
Purpose: Amend penalties under MCL 333.7401 for marijuana-related crimes
-
Focus Areas:
-
Unlicensed manufacturing
-
Possession thresholds for flower and concentrate
-
Differentiation between personal and commercial-scale offenses
-
Penalty Breakdown
-
Misdemeanor Offenses:
-
10–25 kg of marijuana
-
50–100 plants
-
1–2.5 kg of concentrate
-
-
Felony Offenses:
-
Over 250 kg of marijuana
-
Over 1,000 plants
-
Over 10 kg of concentrate
-
Up to 10 years imprisonment for highest tier offenses
-
LINKS
View the relevant law at [MCL 333.7401]
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is Michigan House Bill 5105?
Answer: House Bill 5105 is a proposed amendment to Michigan’s Public Health Code (MCL 333.7401) that redefines criminal penalties for marijuana-related offenses. It introduces tiered punishments based on the amount of marijuana or concentrate possessed or manufactured, aiming to target large-scale illegal cannabis operations while distinguishing them from personal use.
Who introduced HB 5105 and why?
Answer: HB 5105 was introduced on October 22, 2025, by Rep. Pauline Wendzel and co-sponsored by several other lawmakers. The bill was created in response to growing concerns about unlicensed marijuana grow operations and trafficking, which pose risks to public safety and undermine Michigan’s regulated cannabis market.
What are the proposed penalties under HB 5105?
Answer: The bill proposes penalties based on possession thresholds:
- Misdemeanor: 10–25 kg of marijuana, 50–100 plants, or 1–2.5 kg of concentrate.
- Felony: Over 250 kg of marijuana, over 1,000 plants, or over 10 kg of concentrate, with up to 10 years imprisonment.
These penalties are designed to differentiate between personal use and commercial-scale illegal activity.
Does HB 5105 affect medical marijuana patients?
Answer: No, HB 5105 does not directly target registered medical marijuana patients who comply with Michigan’s medical cannabis laws. The bill focuses on unlicensed manufacturing and possession beyond legal limits, particularly in cases involving trafficking or large-scale cultivation.
Is HB 5105 currently law?
Answer: As of November 2025, HB 5105 is still under review by the House Regulatory Reform Committee. It has not yet been passed into law. You can track its progress and read the full bill text on the Michigan Legislature Website.
Don’t forget about HB4951 you didn’t vote for
Legal Defense: Komorn Law PLLC
If you or someone you know is facing marijuana-related charges under from the cannabis enforcement teams or federal drug laws, Attorney Michael Komorn of Komorn Law PLLC offers aggressive and strategic defense. With decades of experience in cannabis law and federal litigation, Komorn Law understands the nuances of Michigan’s evolving marijuana regulations and how to challenge overreach or misapplication in court.
Komorn Law can:
- Challenge unlawful search and seizure
- Dispute quantity assessments and intent
- Navigate federal vs. state law conflicts
- Advocate for reduced or dismissed charges
More Articles
Don’t worry – There’s always a workaround
In case you did not know...The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the smell of marijuana alone is no longer...
Motion in Limine vs Motion to Suppress
Defininition and Explaination - Motion in LimineOverview Although both a motion in limine and a motion to suppress...
A Motion in Limine – What does it Mean?
Defininition and Explaination - Motion in LimineA motion in limine is a pretrial request asking the judge to exclude...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Threat of Terrorism
Case Summary In People v Kvasnicka, the defendant sent a message to a young girl stating she “would not be laughing”...
More
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Prisoner in Possession
Prisoner in Possession of a Controlled SubstanceCase Summary In People v Tadgerson, the Michigan Supreme Court addressed a critical question: does the crime of a prisoner possessing a controlled substance under MCL 800.281(4) require proof of intent, or is it a...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Murder
Case Summary In People v Jones, the Michigan Court of Appeals addressed whether a single act of abuse can support convictions for both first‑degree child abuse and felony murder. The defendant argued that using the same conduct to support both charges violated...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Neglect of Duty
Case Summary In People v Harper, a Wayne County Sheriff’s deputy was charged with neglect of duty after witnessing an inmate escape during his smoke break and taking no action to stop or pursue the prisoner. The prosecution relied on the Sheriff’s Department policy...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Metallic Knuckles
Case Summary In People v Dummer, the defendant challenged Michigan’s metallic‑knuckles statute, arguing that simply possessing the weapon was protected by the Second Amendment. The Michigan Court of Appeals acknowledged that possession of metallic knuckles is...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Election Interference
Case Summary In People v Burkman, defendants created a robocall targeting African American voters during the 2020 election. The call falsely warned that mail‑in voting would expose voters to law‑enforcement tracking, debt collection, and forced vaccinations....
Court to Allow Challenge to Michigan’s New 24% Cannabis Tax
Summary A Michigan Court of Claims judge has ruled that the lawsuit challenging the state’s newly enacted 24% wholesale marijuana excise tax may proceed. The ruling, issued January 5, 2026, keeps alive a significant constitutional challenge brought by industry groups...
