A long-simmering jailhouse grudge has landed a Cheboygan man in state prison. Barry Hopkinson, 61, was sentenced to three to 15 years after pleading guilty to attempting to make a terroristic threat as a habitual fourth offender. Visiting Judge Colin Hunter of the 46th Circuit Court handed down the prison term on June 18. Prosecutors say Hopkinson’s threats targeted a circuit court judge and county prosecutors and grew out of complaints he made while locked up on an earlier stalking conviction.
State investigators say the case traces back to January 2025, when Hopkinson repeatedly protested his treatment in the Cheboygan County Jail. Authorities allege he went beyond venting and laid out plans to obtain firearms after his release in order to harm staff at the 53rd Circuit Court, specifically naming a circuit court judge, the Cheboygan County prosecutor and an assistant prosecutor, according to the Tampa Free Press.
Attorney General's Unit Handled The Prosecution
The case landed with the Michigan Department of Attorney General’s Hate Crimes and Domestic Terrorism Unit, which Attorney General Dana Nessel created in 2019 to prosecute cases under the state’s anti-terrorism statute. That office has taken on similar threat cases in recent years and stresses that threats against judges and prosecutors are treated as serious public safety matters. Residents are urged to contact local police first when they believe someone is in immediate danger, as detailed by the Michigan Attorney General.
Court Fight Over The Law Complicates Prosecutions
All of this is unfolding while Michigan’s anti-terrorism statute is tied up in a high-level legal fight. The Michigan Court of Appeals previously declared the law constitutionally defective, only to have the Michigan Supreme Court wipe that ruling away and send the case back for more analysis. The back-and-forth has left unresolved what level of intent prosecutors must prove in these prosecutions, an issue laid out in the Court of Appeals opinion in People v. Kvasnicka.
Lawmakers Pushing To Clarify The Statute
Lawmakers, sensing the legal gray area, are trying to tighten things up. Senate Bill 502, sponsored by Sen. Sue Shink, passed the Michigan Senate unanimously in March. The proposal would make it a felony, punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a maximum $20,000 fine, to communicate a terrorist threat with reckless disregard. The bill is now parked in the House Judiciary Committee awaiting further action, according to legislative tracking.
“My office will continue to uphold the law and prosecute those who threaten prosecutors and members of the judiciary,” Attorney General Dana Nessel said in a statement reported by the Tampa Free Press. Her comments reflect prosecutors’ insistence that court staff and judges must be protected even while the exact contours of the law are being hashed out.
The Hopkinson case has become a local example of a broader tension: how to protect public officials without criminalizing constitutionally protected speech. Defense advocates argue that courts should insist on proof of recklessness or a similar mens rea before a threat case moves forward, while prosecutors and court security officials counter that they need clearer statutory language to deter and punish credible threats. Legal analysts at the State Appellate Defender Office note that the Michigan Supreme Court’s remand in the key test case could shape how the anti-terrorism statute is applied going forward and how future prosecutions, like Hopkinson’s, are framed in court.
