Peace Orders — Rockville, Montgomery County
Yes. Since October 1, 2025, someone can seek a Maryland peace order against you for “intentional visual surveillance” of areas of their residence where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy (Chapter 574 of 2025, adding to CJP § 3-1503). A final order can require you to remove or reposition the camera. Emden Law, in Rockville, defends respondents in Montgomery County.
Maybe you put up a doorbell camera or a floodlight camera years ago. Maybe a dispute with a neighbor, a former roommate or someone down the hall has been building for months. Either way, you have now been served with a peace-order petition — or warned that one is coming — and the complaint points at a camera.
Until October 1, 2025, the honest answer to “can a camera on my property get me a peace order?” was narrower than it is today. Maryland changed the law, and the change reaches surveillance that the older criminal statutes did not. This article explains what the 2025 law says, how a peace-order case moves, what a judge can order about the camera, and where the criminal exposure lies. It is written for the respondent — the person the petition is against — and it is general legal information about your rights and the process. Nothing here describes a way around a court order, because there is no lawful one: until a judge changes it, an order binds you completely.
Key points
- A new peace-order ground took effect October 1, 2025. Chapter 574 of 2025 (House Bill 236; the Senate’s identical Senate Bill 92 became Chapter 575) added “intentional visual surveillance … of areas of the petitioner’s residence where the petitioner has a reasonable expectation of privacy” to the acts that support a peace order.
- The petition must be filed within 30 days of the act, and a final order requires the judge to find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that you committed the act and are likely to commit one in the future — unless you consent to the order.
- A final order can address the camera directly: it may order you to “[r]emove or reposition a device being used for visual surveillance within 15 days after issuance” and to “[r]efrain from further visual surveillance.”
- The same law made residential surveillance a form of criminal harassment — but only with the intent to harass, alarm or annoy, after a reasonable warning or request to stop, and without a legal purpose (Criminal Law § 3-803).
- Violating a peace order’s no-contact and stay-away terms is a crime, and an officer with probable cause “shall arrest” (CJP § 3-1508).
Can Someone Get a Peace Order Against You for a Security Camera in Maryland? What the 2025 Law Covers (Chapter 574; CJP § 3-1503; CR § 3-803) — and What It Does Not Reach
A peace order is Maryland’s civil stay-away order for disputes that fall outside the domestic protective-order statute. The peace-order subtitle does not apply to a petitioner who is “a person eligible for relief, as defined in § 4–501 of the Family Law Article” — that person seeks a protective order instead — and it does not apply to “[a] respondent who is a child at the time of the alleged commission of an act” (Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-1502(b), mgaleg.maryland.gov). Disputes between adult neighbors, co-workers and acquaintances usually fall on the peace-order side. (Our article on the difference between a peace order and a protective order covers that line.)
The new ground, in the statute’s words
Chapter 574 of 2025, approved by the Governor on May 13, 2025 and effective October 1, 2025, added a thirteenth item to the list of acts in CJP § 3-1503(a)(1) that can support a petition:
“(XIII) INTENTIONAL VISUAL SURVEILLANCE, WHETHER OR NOT PROHIBITED UNDER § 3–901, § 3–902, OR § 3–903 OF THE CRIMINAL LAW ARTICLE, OF AREAS OF THE PETITIONER’S RESIDENCE WHERE THE PETITIONER HAS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.” (Chapter 574, 2025 Laws of Maryland, chapter text; capital letters mark new language)
The same Act also expanded what a final peace order can contain and amended the harassment statute, Criminal Law § 3-803. One practical note: as of October 2026, the General Assembly’s online compiled text of § 3-1503 still did not display this new item, so the chapter law is the place to read it. The Maryland Judiciary’s own peace-order petition, form DC-PO-001 (Rev. 10/2025), lists “visual surveillance” among the acts a petitioner can check and offers the relief “To remove or reposition a device being used for visual surveillance and refrain from further visual surveillance.”
Why the old surveillance crimes did not answer the question
Visual surveillance was already a peace-order ground before 2025 — but only “[v]isual surveillance under § 3–901, § 3–902, or § 3–903 of the Criminal Law Article” (§ 3-1503(a)(1)(xii)). Those crimes are narrow:
- § 3-901 reaches visual surveillance of an individual in a “private place,” which it defines as “a dressing room or rest room in a retail store.”
- § 3-902 requires “prurient intent.”
- § 3-903 prohibits placing a camera “on real property where a private residence is located to conduct deliberate surreptitious observation of an individual inside the private residence” — and expressly “does not apply to … filming of a private residence by a person through use of a camera that is not located on the real property where the private residence is located” (§ 3-903(b)(7), mgaleg.maryland.gov).
The 2025 ground applies “whether or not” the surveillance is prohibited by those three sections. That is the change: intentional surveillance of areas of someone else’s residence where that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy can now support a peace order even when none of the older crimes would apply.
What “residence” includes
The peace-order subtitle defines it broadly: “’Residence’ includes the yard, grounds, outbuildings, and common areas surrounding the residence” (CJP § 3-1501, mgaleg.maryland.gov). The harassment statute uses the same definition (CR § 3-803(a)(2)).
What it does not reach
The new ground itself has no exceptions written into it. Beyond the subtitle’s general limits in § 3-1502 and its other requirements — the 30-day window and the judge’s findings among them — what limits it are its own elements:
- It must be intentional. The word is in the statute.
- It must be surveillance of areas of the petitioner’s residence — which, under the definition above, includes the yard, grounds, outbuildings and common areas.
- It must be of areas where the petitioner has a reasonable expectation of privacy. The statute does not list which areas qualify; that is a question decided on the facts of each case.
- And a petition is only the start. A final order still requires the judge’s findings described in the next section.
The criminal version in CR § 3-803 has additional limits of its own, covered in the last section below.
The Peace-Order Track, Step by Step: the 30-Day Filing Window, Interim and Temporary Orders, the Final Hearing’s Two Findings, and an Order of Up to Six Months (CJP §§ 3-1503–3-1506)
The 30-day window
A petition must allege an act that “occurred within 30 days before the filing of the petition” (CJP § 3-1503(a)(1)). It is filed with the District Court of Maryland, or with a District Court commissioner “when the Office of the District Court Clerk is not open for business” (§ 3-1503.1(a)).
The interim order (a commissioner)
A commissioner may issue an interim peace order on “reasonable grounds to believe that the respondent has committed, and is likely to commit in the future,” a listed act (§ 3-1503.1(b)). It lasts until the earlier of the temporary-order hearing or “[t]he end of the second business day the Office of the Clerk of the District Court is open following the issuance” (§ 3-1503.1(g)(1)), and the temporary hearing is ordinarily held “on the first or second day on which a District Court judge is sitting after issuance” (§ 3-1503.1(d)(1)(ii)).
The temporary order (a judge)
A District Court judge may issue a temporary peace order on the same reasonable-grounds standard, “whether ex parte or otherwise” (§ 3-1504(a)(1)(i)). It is effective “for not more than 7 days after service of the order,” and the judge may extend it “as needed, but not to exceed 30 days,” to effectuate service or for other good cause (§ 3-1504(c), mgaleg.maryland.gov).
The final hearing and its two findings
Unless continued for good cause, “the final peace order hearing shall be held no later than 7 days after the temporary peace order is served on the respondent” (§ 3-1505(b)(1)(ii)). You “shall have an opportunity to be heard” (§ 3-1505(a)). The judge may issue a final order if the judge “finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent has committed, and is likely to commit in the future,” a listed act — “or if the respondent consents to the entry of a peace order” (§ 3-1505(c)(1)(ii), mgaleg.maryland.gov). Both findings matter: a past act alone is not enough without a finding of likely future acts.
How long a final order lasts
“All relief granted in a final peace order shall be effective for the period stated in the order, not to exceed 6 months” (§ 3-1505(f)). For good cause, after notice and a hearing, a judge “may extend the term of the peace order for 6 months beyond” that period (§ 3-1506(a)(2)). Either side may appeal a District Court decision to the circuit court, where the appeal “shall be heard de novo,” and the District Court judgment stays in effect until superseded (§ 3-1506(b)).
The 2026 protective-order change does not apply here
On October 1, 2026, Maryland lengthened the temporary protective-order clock to 14 days from issuance. That change, Chapter 791 of 2026, amended only Family Law §§ 4-505 and 4-506. The peace-order deadlines above — seven days, in CJP §§ 3-1504 and 3-1505 — did not change.
What a Judge Can Order About the Camera — Removal or Repositioning — and the Relief a Peace Order Cannot Include
The camera provision
The 2025 Act added a seventh item to the relief a final peace order may include:
“For an act of visual surveillance, order the respondent to: 1. Remove or reposition a device being used for visual surveillance within 15 days after issuance of a final peace order under this section; and 2. Refrain from further visual surveillance.” (CJP § 3-1505(d)(1)(vii))
That provision appears only in the final-order list. The relief lists for interim and temporary orders do not include it, although those orders can direct a respondent to “[r]efrain from committing or threatening to commit an act specified in § 3–1503(a)” (§§ 3-1503.1(c)(2)(i), 3-1504(a)(2)(i)).
The rest of the list — and its limits
A final peace order “may include any or all of the following relief”: an order to refrain from committing or threatening a listed act; to refrain from “contacting, attempting to contact, or harassing” the petitioner; to stay out of the petitioner’s residence; to remain away from the petitioner’s work, school or temporary residence; to participate in counseling or, “if the parties are amenable,” mediation; and an order that “either party … pay filing fees and costs” — plus the camera provision (§ 3-1505(d)(1)). And the order “shall contain only the relief that is minimally necessary to protect the petitioner” (§ 3-1505(d)(2)).
The list does not include the broader relief of a domestic protective order — nothing on it awards use of a shared home, custody of children or support. A peace order is a narrower order under a different statute.
If an order issues: comply fully
If a judge orders you to remove or reposition a device, do it within the time the order gives you, stop the surveillance the order describes, and follow every other term. Do not contact the petitioner about the order or the camera — not directly, not through a friend, not online — even if the petitioner reaches out first; the order binds you, not the petitioner. Keep everything: do not delete footage, messages or records, because they are evidence. And talk to a lawyer about any part of the order you do not understand. Only the court can change a court order.
The Criminal Side: a Harassment Charge (CR § 3-803), Violating a Peace Order (CJP § 3-1508), and Why What You Say at the Hearing Can Follow You
Harassment by visual surveillance
The 2025 Act rewrote Maryland’s harassment statute. As amended, Criminal Law § 3-803(b) provides:
“A person may not follow another in or about a public place, conduct visual surveillance of an area of another’s residence where the other has a reasonable expectation of privacy, or maliciously engage in a course of conduct that alarms or seriously annoys the other: (1) with the intent to harass, alarm, or annoy the other; (2) after receiving a reasonable warning or request to stop by or on behalf of the other; and (3) without a legal purpose.” (mgaleg.maryland.gov)
All three conditions must be proved for the crime — intent, a prior warning or request to stop, and no legal purpose. “Visual surveillance” takes its meaning from CR § 3-901: surveillance “by: (i) direct sight; (ii) the use of mirrors; (iii) the use of cameras; or (iv) the use of an electronic device that can be used surreptitiously to observe an individual” — so the statute is not limited to cameras. The section “does not apply to a peaceable activity intended to express a political view or provide information to others,” and “may not be construed in a manner that infringes on any right guaranteed under the United States Constitution or the Maryland Declaration of Rights” (§ 3-803(c)).
The penalties are a misdemeanor: “for a first offense, imprisonment not exceeding 90 days or a fine not exceeding $500 or both,” and “for a second or subsequent offense, imprisonment not exceeding 180 days or a fine not exceeding $1,000 or both” (§ 3-803(d)). Those are statutory maximums, not predictions. Harassment under § 3-803 is also, separately, one of the acts that can support a peace order (§ 3-1503(a)(1)(v)). More on how these charges are defended is on our stalking and harassment page.
Violating a peace order is a crime
Under CJP § 3-1508(a), a person who “fails to comply with the relief granted” in an interim order, a temporary order, or a final order’s no-further-acts, no-contact and stay-away provisions “is guilty of a misdemeanor” — “[f]or a first offense, a fine not exceeding $1,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 90 days or both,” and “[f]or a second or subsequent offense, a fine not exceeding $2,500 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 year or both” (mgaleg.maryland.gov). A prior conviction for violating a protective order counts as a prior conviction for this purpose (§ 3-1508(b)). And a law enforcement officer “shall arrest with or without a warrant” anyone the officer has probable cause to believe is violating an interim, temporary or final peace order (§ 3-1508(c)(1)). Our page on criminal violations of protective and peace orders explains how those cases proceed.
The hearing comes first — and what you say there can follow you
If a criminal charge is pending, or could be filed, the civil peace-order hearing and the criminal case run on parallel tracks — and the order hearing usually comes first. Testimony you give under oath at the civil hearing can be used against you in the criminal case. If you stay silent instead, the judge in the civil case may draw an adverse inference. That tension is the strongest reason to have a lawyer with you at the final hearing; our article on the protective-order final hearing explains the Fifth Amendment timing trap, and the same concern applies in a peace-order case.
Served With a Peace Order Over a Camera in Montgomery County?
A peace-order petition moves fast. The final hearing can come within a week of service, and the questions it turns on — what the camera captured, what you intended, whether you were warned, whether a criminal charge is coming — are exactly the ones that need to be answered carefully before you walk into the courtroom.
Emden Law is Marc Emden’s Rockville practice. He has over 30 years handling civil and criminal cases in Maryland and Washington, DC, and peace orders, protective orders and harassment charges are among the firm’s practice areas. We can tell you what the petition alleges in legal terms, what the petitioner must prove, what a judge can and cannot order, and how the civil case touches any criminal one. What we will not do is promise you a result — nobody honestly can.
Until then, four things: comply fully with any order, make no contact with the petitioner even if invited, preserve your evidence and delete nothing, and get counsel before the hearing. For a confidential consultation, call (301) 241-0596 or reach us through our contact page. You can also read more about Maryland peace orders, the peace-order FAQs, and our legal advice for feuding neighbors.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can someone get a peace order against you for a security camera in Maryland? Yes, if the facts fit. Since October 1, 2025, a petitioner can rely on “intentional visual surveillance … of areas of the petitioner’s residence where the petitioner has a reasonable expectation of privacy” (Chapter 574 of 2025), and the act must have occurred within 30 days before the petition. A final order requires the judge to find by a preponderance of the evidence that you committed the act and are likely to commit one in the future, unless you consent to the order.
Can a judge make me take my camera down? A final peace order can order you to “[r]emove or reposition a device being used for visual surveillance within 15 days after issuance” and to refrain from further visual surveillance (CJP § 3-1505(d)(1)(vii)). That provision is part of the final-order relief, which must be limited to what is “minimally necessary to protect the petitioner” (§ 3-1505(d)(2)). If it is ordered, comply within the time the order gives you.
How long does a Maryland peace order last? A final peace order lasts for the period stated in it, “not to exceed 6 months” (CJP § 3-1505(f)). After notice and a hearing, a judge may extend it for good cause by another six months (§ 3-1506(a)(2)).
Is a peace order a criminal conviction? No. A peace order is a civil order, decided under the civil preponderance standard. But violating its no-contact and stay-away terms is a misdemeanor under CJP § 3-1508, and the underlying conduct can be charged separately — for example, as harassment under CR § 3-803 if its elements are met.
Can a peace order be removed from public view? Sometimes. CJP § 3-1510 allows a request to shield the court records only if the petition was denied or dismissed, or if the respondent consented to the order — there is no shielding route for a contested final order that was granted. Under § 3-1510(c), a request “may not be filed within 3 years after the denial or dismissal of the petition or the consent to the entry of the peace order unless the requesting party files with the request a general waiver and release of all the party’s tort claims related to the proceeding under this subtitle.” On a denied or dismissed petition the court “shall” shield on the required findings, though it may deny shielding for good cause (§ 3-1510(d)(3)–(4)); on a consented order it “may,” and for a respondent’s request the petitioner’s consent is generally among the findings (mgaleg.maryland.gov). Information about the proceeding “may not be removed from the Domestic Violence Central Repository.”
What is the difference between a peace order and a protective order? The relationship. A protective order (Family Law § 4-501 et seq.) is for a “person eligible for relief” as that section defines it — generally family members and certain intimate or household relationships. A peace order (CJP § 3-1501 et seq.) generally covers other disputes — though not one in which the respondent was a child at the time of the act (§ 3-1502(b)(2)) — with a shorter maximum duration and a narrower list of relief.
This article is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Maryland law changes and every case turns on its specific facts. Consult a licensed Maryland attorney about your situation. (Maryland Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct 19-307.1.)
Nothing here should be read as guidance on avoiding, delaying, or softening compliance with a court order; a peace order binds the respondent until a judge changes it.
