Bill Would Let Courts Grant Peace Orders to Stop ‘Intentional’ Visual Surveillance

Delegate William Valentine told the House Judiciary Committee that House Bill 236 would add “intentional visual surveillance” of areas of a residence where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy to the list of acts that could support a peace order.

"This bill adds intentional visual surveillance to areas of an individual's residence where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy to the list of acts for which an individual may seek relief by obtaining a peace order," Valentine said, adding that the bill does not create a new crime or add penalties.

Hannah Leatherman, whose family described two years of neighbor surveillance in written testimony and to the committee, said cameras were placed five feet off the property line, viewed the family’s barn and allowed the neighbor to monitor their children and animals. "When we asked why, his response was because he could," she told the committee.

Valentine said he and the senator working on the cross‑file had worked with the Maryland judiciary to narrow the bill’s wording, including making the language about the conduct intentional and adding authority for judges to order repositioning or removal of cameras in appropriate cases.

Committee members asked about how courts would determine reasonable expectation of privacy in yards of differing sizes and about evidence of sequential acts (for example, moving cameras after owners blocked view) that could demonstrate intentionality. The sponsor said the bill is intended to allow judicial officers to evaluate the facts and issue relief where appropriate.

Ending — Committee members asked follow‑up questions; no vote was recorded at the hearing.