The Clean Slate Law; Automatic set-aside eligibility & exclusions; MCL 780.621g(2), (5)-(7), & (10); Principle that conviction reinstatement requires lack of good-faith effort to pay restitution; MCL 780.621h(3); MCR 6.451; Statutory interpretation; People v Gardner; Principle that a restitution obligation survives set-aside & is enforceable civilly; MCL 780.622(7); MCL 780.766(13)

The court held that MCL 780.621h(3) permits reinstating a conviction set aside under the Clean Slate Law only if the trial court determines the defendant has not made a good-faith effort to pay restitution. In this case, defendant pled guilty to two counts of fraudulent use of contract funds, received probation and jail time, and, per a stipulation, owed $472,435.99 in restitution to be converted to a civil judgment after probation. In 7/23 his convictions were automatically set aside under MCL 780.621g. The trial court later held a hearing and found defendant was making regular, substantial payments on the civil judgments. But after the prosecutor argued that any unpaid restitution required reinstatement until fully satisfied, the trial court reinstated the convictions. On appeal, the court rejected that reading, emphasizing that “[u]nder the plain language of Subsection (3), a trial court is authorized to reinstate the conviction only if the trial court makes a factual determination that the defendant failed to make a good-faith effort to pay.” It noted that set-aside does not erase restitution obligations, which continue to be enforceable in the same manner as civil judgments. Because the trial court had expressly found good-faith payment efforts and the prosecution offered no contrary evidence, reinstatement was improper. Vacated and remanded to reinstate the set-aside order.