EnglishEspañol
Recording LawsMinnesota LawVoyeurismPrivacy

Minnesota Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Offenses, Penalties, and Protections

Independently fact-checkedEditor-reviewedLaw current as of November 1, 2026By Recording Law Editorial TeamReviewed November 2, 202614 min read

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 9 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Minnesota Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Offenses, Penalties, and Protections

Minnesota prohibits secretly peeping or recording through a window or other opening into a home (after entering the property) or another private place with intent to intrude on privacy, and using any device in a private place to capture images of a person's intimate parts without consent, under Minn. Stat. 609.746. A first offense is a gross misdemeanor carrying up to 364 days in jail and a $3,000 fine, with felony penalties for repeat offenses or cases involving minors. Recording under or around clothing is graded lower and starts as a misdemeanor.

Overview of Minnesota Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws

Minnesota takes a strong stance against voyeurism and hidden camera surveillance. The state has multiple statutes that address different aspects of invasive recording, from surreptitious surveillance in private spaces to the distribution of intimate images without consent. These laws protect individuals' privacy and dignity against both physical surveillance devices and digital distribution of private content.

The primary statutes governing voyeurism and hidden cameras in Minnesota include:

Interference with Privacy: Minn. Stat. Section 609.746

Minnesota dome security camera in the corner of an office ceiling, soft interior daylight

What the Statute Prohibits

Minn. Stat. Section 609.746 is Minnesota's primary anti-voyeurism statute. Its core offenses each require specific elements. It is a crime to enter another's property and surreptitiously peep, or install or use any device for observing, photographing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting sounds or events, through the window or other aperture of another's house or dwelling, with intent to intrude upon or interfere with the privacy of a member of the household. It is also a crime to surreptitiously peep, or install or use such a device, through the window or other aperture of a hotel sleeping room, a tanning booth, or another place where a reasonable person would have an expectation of privacy and has exposed or is likely to expose their intimate parts (or the clothing covering them), with intent to intrude upon the occupant's privacy. A separate paragraph covers using any device to photograph, record, or broadcast an image of a person in a home, hotel sleeping room, tanning booth, bathroom, locker room, changing room, indoor shower facility, or any place where a reasonable person would have an expectation of privacy, with the intent to capture an image of the person's intimate parts without consent.

Minnesota voyeurism penalties run from a misdemeanor with up to 90 days for a first under-clothing recording to felonies with up to 4 or 5 years for minor victims or repeat offenses.
Secretly peeping or recording into a private place with intent to intrude, or recording intimate parts without consent, starts as a gross misdemeanor in Minnesota and becomes a felony for repeats or minors.

The statute covers a wide range of conduct:

  • Installing hidden cameras in bathrooms, bedrooms, locker rooms, or changing areas to capture intimate parts without consent
  • Using devices to look through windows into another's home after entering the property, with intent to intrude on the household's privacy
  • Photographing or recording someone in a state of undress without their knowledge
  • Using telescopes, binoculars, or other optical devices after entering another's property, to peer into a dwelling with intent to intrude on the household's privacy
  • Placing cameras under clothing to capture upskirt images
  • Using any device to capture images of a person's intimate parts without consent where a reasonable person expects privacy

Most of the statute's paragraphs require "surreptitious" (secret or stealthy) conduct, but the paragraph covering recordings of intimate parts in homes, hotel rooms, tanning booths, bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, showers and similar private places does not: an openly visible camera used that way without consent is still a crime. Open recording of ordinary activity in public is not covered.

Statutory Exemptions

Minn. Stat. Section 609.746, subdivision 1, paragraph (k) exempts certain conduct from the statute's core prohibitions. Paragraphs (b), (d), and (e) do not apply to law enforcement officers or corrections investigators acting within their lawful duties. Paragraphs (c), (d), and (e), the private-place peeping and recording offenses, do not apply to conduct in a medical facility, or in a commercial establishment if the owner has posted conspicuous signs warning that the premises are under surveillance by the owner or employees. The medical-facility and sign exemptions do not extend to residential rental units or other non-commercial settings, and the sign exemption never covers paragraph (f) (recording under or around clothing), audio recording under the wiretap law, or a civil privacy lawsuit.

Criminal Penalties

The penalties for interference with privacy escalate based on prior offenses and whether minors are involved:

Offense TypeClassificationMaximum Prison TermMaximum Fine
Private-place offenses (paras. a-e), first offense (adult victim)Gross misdemeanor364 days$3,000
Paras. a-e after a prior conviction under the statute or the stalking statuteFelony2 years$5,000
Paras. a-e against a minor the offender knew or had reason to know was present (general)Felony2 years$5,000
Minor victim, 36+ month age gap, sexual intent (paragraphs b, d, or e)Felony4 years$5,000
Recording under or around clothing (para. f), first offenseMisdemeanor90 days$1,000
Para. f after a prior conviction, or against a known minorGross misdemeanor364 days$3,000
Para. f after two or more prior convictionsFelony5 years$10,000

Disseminating images obtained through a Section 609.746 violation is a separate offense under Minn. Stat. Section 617.261, punishable by up to 3 years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

Under Minn. Stat. Section 243.166, subdivision 1b, a person charged with a felony and convicted of surreptitious intrusion under the circumstances in Section 609.746, subdivision 1(h) (minor victim, offender more than 36 months older, sexual intent) must register as a predatory offender. Registration is also required when a person charged with a listed felony sex offense, such as criminal sexual conduct, is convicted of any Section 609.746 offense arising out of the same set of circumstances.

Places the Statute Covers

The window-peeping paragraphs protect "a house or place of dwelling of another." Other paragraphs name hotel sleeping rooms, tanning booths, bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, indoor shower facilities, and any place where a reasonable person would have an expectation of privacy. The statute does not itemize types of residences. Paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) do not apply to conduct in a medical facility.

The statute also reaches non-residential settings like bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, and other places where a reasonable person would have an expectation of privacy, but only for conduct aimed at a person who has exposed or is likely to expose intimate parts (or the clothing covering them) there, or at capturing images of their intimate parts without consent.

The "Reasonable Expectation of Privacy" Standard

Minnesota courts evaluate whether a person had a reasonable expectation of privacy by looking at two factors:

  1. Subjective expectation. Did the person actually believe they were not being observed or recorded?
  2. Objective reasonableness. Would a reasonable person in the same circumstances have the same expectation?

Both factors must be present. A person who is naked in a bathroom has both a subjective and objectively reasonable expectation of privacy. A person standing on a public sidewalk has no reasonable expectation that they are not being observed, regardless of their subjective belief.

Nonconsensual Dissemination of Intimate Images

Minnesota blank security access card on a navy lanyard on a white desk

Minn. Stat. Section 617.261

Minn. Stat. Section 617.261 criminalizes what is commonly known as "revenge porn," the distribution of intimate images without the depicted person's consent. The statute makes it a crime to intentionally disseminate an image of another person who is:

  • Depicted in a sexual act, or
  • Whose intimate parts are exposed

when the person is identifiable, the person disseminating the image knows or reasonably should know that the depicted person does not consent to the dissemination, and the image was obtained or created under circumstances in which the disseminator knew or reasonably should have known the person depicted had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The statute covers distribution through any medium, including:

  • Social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, X, TikTok, etc.)
  • Messaging apps (text messages, WhatsApp, Telegram, etc.)
  • Email
  • Websites and forums
  • Physical distribution (printed copies)
  • Peer-to-peer file sharing

Penalties for Nonconsensual Dissemination

OffenseClassificationMaximum Prison TermMaximum Fine
Basic offenseGross misdemeanor364 days$3,000
Prior conviction under the same chapterFelony3 years$5,000
Person depicted suffers financial lossFelony3 years$5,000
Dissemination with intent to profitFelony3 years$5,000
Image posted on a website, or offender runs a site or app for disseminating itFelony3 years$5,000
Intent to harass the person depictedFelony3 years$5,000
Image obtained through theft, interference with privacy, or a computer crimeFelony3 years$5,000

Those are the statute's only felony factors. Emotional distress or reputational damage on its own does not make the offense a felony, though it can support damages in a civil suit.

Elements of the Offense

To secure a conviction under Section 617.261, prosecutors must prove:

  1. The defendant intentionally disseminated an image
  2. The image depicted another person in a sexual act or with intimate parts exposed
  3. The person depicted is identifiable from the image or from information displayed with it
  4. The defendant knew or reasonably should have known the person did not consent to the dissemination
  5. The image was obtained or created under circumstances in which the defendant knew or reasonably should have known the person depicted had a reasonable expectation of privacy

Consent to being photographed or recorded does not automatically constitute consent to dissemination. A person who agreed to be photographed in an intimate setting has not necessarily agreed to have those images shared with others.

Civil Remedies for Victims

Minnesota wooden gavel on a sound block on a judge bench

Minn. Stat. Section 604.31

Victims of nonconsensual image dissemination have a powerful civil remedy under Minn. Stat. Section 604.31. This statute allows victims to file civil lawsuits against the person who disseminated their images. Available remedies include:

  • General and special damages, including financial losses and damages for mental anguish
  • The defendant's profits from the dissemination
  • A civil penalty of up to $10,000
  • Injunctive relief ordering the defendant to stop disseminating images and remove existing copies
  • Attorney fees and court costs awarded to the prevailing plaintiff

The civil remedy is separate from criminal prosecution. A victim can pursue both a criminal complaint and a civil lawsuit, and success in one does not depend on the other.

Civil Claims Under Section 626A.13

If the voyeurism involved illegal audio interception (for example, a hidden camera that also recorded audio), the victim may also have a civil claim under Minn. Stat. Section 626A.13. This statute provides:

  • Two-prong damages (whichever is greater), at the court's discretion: the court may award three times actual damages plus any profits from the violation, or statutory damages of the greater of $100 per day or $10,000
  • Punitive damages at the court's discretion
  • Attorney fees and litigation costs

Restraining Orders

Victims of voyeurism and nonconsensual image sharing can seek harassment restraining orders under Minn. Stat. Section 609.748. A restraining order can prohibit the offender from contacting the victim and from further disseminating intimate images.

Common Voyeurism Scenarios in Minnesota

Hidden Cameras in Rental Properties

Landlords or previous tenants who hide cameras in rental units, such as in a bathroom or bedroom, to capture tenants' intimate parts without consent, or who secretly record into a unit's bathroom or bedroom through a wall opening or other aperture with intent to intrude on tenants' privacy, violate Section 609.746. Common hiding places include:

  • Smoke detector housings
  • Electrical outlets and power strips
  • Clock radios and alarm clocks
  • Bathroom vents and fixtures
  • Picture frames and decorative items
  • Behind mirrors

Tenants who discover hidden cameras should contact law enforcement immediately and preserve the device as evidence if possible without disturbing it. For more information about camera issues in rental properties, see our page on Minnesota landlord-tenant recording laws.

Hidden Cameras in Hotels and Vacation Rentals

Guests at hotels, motels, and vacation rentals (Airbnb, Vrbo) have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their rented spaces. Hosts or property managers who use cameras in bedrooms, bathrooms, or other private areas of rental properties to capture guests' intimate parts without consent, or who secretly record into those rooms through a wall opening or other aperture with intent to intrude on guests' privacy, can violate Section 609.746, subject to the exemptions described above.

Vacation rental platforms have policies requiring hosts to disclose any cameras on the property. Undisclosed cameras in private areas violate platform policies and can violate Minnesota law.

Workplace Hidden Cameras

Employers who use cameras in restrooms, locker rooms, changing areas, or other private spaces in the workplace to capture someone's intimate parts without consent, or who secretly record into those spaces through a wall opening or other aperture with intent to intrude on privacy, can violate Section 609.746, subject to the exemptions described above. Workplace voyeurism can also give rise to sexual harassment claims under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Minn. Stat. Chapter 363A).

For more about workplace surveillance, see our page on Minnesota workplace recording laws.

Upskirt and Downblouse Photography

Using a camera to capture images under a person's clothing or down their shirt without consent constitutes surreptitious surveillance under Section 609.746, even in public settings. The victim has a reasonable expectation that the covered portions of their body are not being photographed.

This conduct falls under paragraph (f), which has its own, lower penalty ladder. A first upskirt offense is a misdemeanor (up to 90 days and $1,000). It becomes a gross misdemeanor after a prior conviction or when the offender knew or had reason to know the victim was a minor, and a felony (up to 5 years and $10,000) after two or more prior convictions.

Peeping Tom Activity

Traditional peeping tom behavior, using binoculars, cameras, or other devices to observe people inside their homes through windows, is squarely covered by Section 609.746. Modern technology has expanded the tools available for this type of surveillance (drones, high-powered cameras, night vision devices), and the law covers any device used for surreptitious observation when the statute's other elements, including intent to intrude on privacy, are met.

Deepfake and AI-Generated Intimate Images

Minnesota's Deepfake Laws

Minnesota has addressed the growing problem of AI-generated intimate images. It is a crime to intentionally share a realistic deepfake that depicts a real person's intimate parts or a sexual act without that person's consent. The state's provisions:

  • Criminalize disseminating AI-generated intimate images without consent (creating one without sharing it is not separately a crime under these sections)
  • Allow the person depicted to sue for damages

Minn. Stat. Section 609.771 addresses deepfakes in the context of elections, prohibiting their use to injure a candidate or influence an election's result within 90 days before a political party nominating convention, or after the start of the absentee voting period before a primary or general election. A First Amendment challenge to this statute failed on procedural grounds: the district court denied a preliminary injunction in January 2025 because the plaintiff had unreasonably delayed in seeking relief, and the Eighth Circuit affirmed that denial in Kohls v. Ellison, No. 25-1300 (8th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026). The merits of the First Amendment challenge remain undecided on remand in the district court. Minnesota's 2023 c 58 deepfake package (signed May 26, 2023, effective Aug. 1, 2023) added two critical provisions: Minn. Stat. Section 617.262 criminalizes disseminating nonconsensual AI-generated intimate images (NCII deepfakes); and Minn. Stat. Section 604.32 lets the person depicted sue for damages, including mental anguish, the defendant's profits, attorney fees, and a civil penalty of up to $100,000. The existing nonconsensual dissemination statute (Section 617.261) remains the primary remedy for non-AI intimate images.

The MCDPA and Biometric Data

The Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act (MCDPA), effective July 31, 2025, requires covered businesses to get consent before processing biometric data, such as facial geometry or voiceprints, to identify a specific person. It applies only to larger data handlers (generally those processing data on 100,000 or more Minnesota consumers a year), not to individuals.

Defenses to Voyeurism Charges

Consent is a complete defense to voyeurism charges. If the person being observed or recorded knew about and agreed to the surveillance, no violation has occurred. However, consent must be knowing and voluntary. Consent obtained through deception or coercion is not valid.

Lack of Surreptitious Conduct

Most paragraphs of the statute require surreptitious (secret or stealthy) conduct, and an openly visible camera may defeat that element. The paragraph covering recordings of intimate parts in bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, showers and similar private places has no secrecy element, so an openly visible camera used that way without consent is still a crime.

No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy

If the recording occurred in a location where the person had no reasonable expectation of privacy (such as a public street or park), the private-place paragraphs of the statute do not apply. The place is part of the offense, so the prosecution must prove it along with the other elements.

Law Enforcement Authorization

Law enforcement officers and corrections investigators, and those acting under their direction, are exempt from paragraphs (b), (d) and (e) of the statute while performing their lawful duties.

Reporting Voyeurism in Minnesota

How to Report

Victims of voyeurism or hidden camera surveillance should:

  1. Contact local law enforcement to file a police report. Provide as much detail as possible about the device, its location, and how it was discovered.
  2. Do not disturb the device if it can be safely left in place for law enforcement to collect as evidence.
  3. Document the discovery with photographs showing the device's location and orientation.
  4. Consult with an attorney about criminal complaints and civil remedies.
  5. Contact the Minnesota Department of Human Rights if the voyeurism occurred in a workplace, housing, or public accommodation setting.

Victim Resources

Minnesota victims of voyeurism and nonconsensual image distribution can access resources through:

Penalties Summary

StatuteOffenseClassificationMaximum Penalty
Section 609.746Private-place surveillance, paras. a-e (first, adult)Gross misdemeanor364 days / $3,000
Section 609.746Paras. a-e repeat offense or minor victim (general)Felony2 years / $5,000
Section 609.746Minor victim, 36+ month age gap, sexual intentFelony4 years / $5,000
Section 609.746Under-clothing recording, para. f (first offense)Misdemeanor90 days / $1,000
Section 609.746Para. f after a prior conviction, or a known minor victimGross misdemeanor364 days / $3,000
Section 609.746Para. f after two or more prior convictionsFelony5 years / $10,000
Section 617.261Nonconsensual dissemination (basic)Gross misdemeanor364 days / $3,000
Section 617.261Aggravated disseminationFelony3 years / $5,000
Section 626A.02Illegal audio interceptionFelony5 years / $20,000

More Minnesota Recording Laws

Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording

Back to Minnesota Recording Laws

More Minnesota Recording Topics

More Minnesota Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the penalty for voyeurism in Minnesota?

A first offense of private-place surveillance under Minn. Stat. Section 609.746, paragraphs (a) through (e), is a gross misdemeanor carrying up to 364 days in jail and a $3,000 fine. An offense after a prior conviction, or against a minor the offender knew or had reason to know was present, is a felony punishable by up to 2 years in prison and a $5,000 fine; an offense against a minor with a 36-plus month age gap and sexual intent carries up to 4 years. Recording under or around clothing (paragraph (f)) is graded lower: a misdemeanor (up to 90 days and $1,000) for a first offense, a gross misdemeanor after a prior conviction or against a minor the offender knew or had reason to know was a minor, and a felony (up to 5 years and $10,000) after two or more prior convictions.

Is revenge porn illegal in Minnesota?

Yes. Nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images is a crime under Minn. Stat. Section 617.261. The basic offense is a gross misdemeanor (up to 364 days and $3,000). It is a felony (up to 3 years and $5,000) if the person depicted suffers financial loss, the sharer acts for profit or to harass, posts the image on a website or runs a site or app for such images, obtained the image through a crime such as interference with privacy, or has a prior conviction. Victims can also sue for civil damages under Section 604.31.

Can I sue someone for placing a hidden camera in my home in Minnesota?

Yes. You can pursue criminal charges under Section 609.746 and file a civil lawsuit for damages. If the hidden camera recorded audio, you may also have a civil claim under Section 626A.13, where a court may award the greater of (1) three times actual damages plus the violator's profits, or (2) statutory damages of the greater of $100 per day or $10,000, plus attorney fees.

Are deepfake intimate images illegal in Minnesota?

Sharing them is. Minn. Stat. Section 617.262 makes it a crime to intentionally share a realistic deepfake that depicts a real person's intimate parts or a sexual act without that person's consent, and Section 604.32 lets the person depicted sue. Creating such an image without sharing it is not separately a crime under these sections. Minn. Stat. Section 609.771 separately prohibits deepfakes used to influence elections.

What should I do if I find a hidden camera in my hotel room or vacation rental in Minnesota?

Contact local law enforcement immediately to file a police report. Do not disturb the device if possible, as it is evidence. Document its location with your own photographs. Report the incident to the hotel management or vacation rental platform. Consult with an attorney about criminal complaints and civil remedies.

Updates

Added the entering-property element to the home peeping offense in the key takeaways and the conduct list.

Clarified that Minnesota's privacy-intrusion offense covers peeping or recording through a window or other opening, while a camera inside a private room is a crime when used to capture intimate parts without consent, and noted the statute's posted-sign exemption for hotels and workplaces.

Corrected how the hidden-camera sentences describe Minnesota's intent and aperture elements under Section 609.746.

Restored the full intent element for hidden cameras in rentals and workplaces: intent to intrude on privacy, or to capture intimate parts.

Added the knowledge-of-age element for the under-clothing minor tier, limited the rental-unit statement to the medical and sign exemptions, and stated that hidden cameras in private areas are a crime when used to capture intimate parts.

We corrected the page to say Minnesota criminalizes sharing, not creating, intimate deepfakes, that openly recording someone's intimate parts in a bathroom or locker room is still a crime, and that the prosecution (not the defendant) must prove the private-place element; we also fixed the 364-day gross-misdemeanor maximum, the felony factors for sharing intimate images, the registration rule, the deepfake damages cap, and removed hospital rooms from the list of protected places. We separated the penalties for recording under or around clothing, which start as a misdemeanor and become a felony only after two or more prior convictions, from the penalties for private-place offenses, corrected a description of the statute's exemption paragraphs, and added that a 609.746 conviction arising from a charged sex offense also requires registration.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes

Corrected our description of Minn. Stat. 609.746 to state the elements the offenses actually require, including intent to intrude on privacy or to capture intimate images, rather than any device use wherever privacy is expected.

Corrected the date of the preliminary-injunction denial in Kohls v. Ellison to January 2025, as stated in the Eighth Circuit opinion.

Added the law-enforcement, medical-facility, and posted-signage commercial exemptions in Minn. Stat. Section 609.746(k), and updated the Kohls v. Ellison litigation status: the preliminary injunction was denied in January 2025 (not 2024), and the Eighth Circuit affirmed that denial in February 2026.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes

Corrected the 609.746 penalty tables: minor-victim violations involving a 36-plus month age gap and sexual intent carry up to 4 years (not 2), disseminating images from a 609.746 violation is a separate offense under 617.261 punishable up to 3 years, and clarified that the 609.771 election-deepfake window ties to a nominating convention or the start of absentee voting rather than a flat 90 days before an election.

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Added 2023 c 58 [deepfake](/us-laws/deepfake-laws) statutes: § 617.262 (criminal NCII deepfake) and § 604.32 (civil NCII deepfake, civil penalty up to $100K; other damages not capped) enacted May 26 2023, eff. Aug. 1 2023; noted Kohls v. Ellison PI denial January 2025 re § 609.771 election deepfake; corrected § 626A.13 subd. 3(b) damages to two-prong structure.

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Sources and References

  1. Minn. Stat. Section 609.746 - Interference with Privacy(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  2. Minn. Stat. Section 617.261 - Nonconsensual Dissemination(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  3. Minn. Stat. Section 604.31 - Civil Remedy(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  4. Minn. Stat. Section 609.771 - Deepfakes(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  5. Minn. Stat. Section 626A.02(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  6. Minn. Stat. Section 626A.13 - Civil Liability(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  7. Minnesota Department of Human Rights(mn.gov).gov
  8. Minn. Stat. Section 617.262 - Criminal NCII Deepfake(revisor.mn.gov).gov
  9. Minn. Stat. Section 604.32 - Civil Action for NCII Deepfake(revisor.mn.gov).gov
Share: