(A) No person, for the purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying the person's self, shall commit trespass or otherwise surreptitiously invade the privacy of another, to spy or eavesdrop upon another.
(B) No person shall knowingly commit trespass or otherwise secretly or surreptitiously videotape, film, photograph, broadcast, stream, or otherwise record another person, in a place where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, for the purpose of viewing the private areas of that person.
(C) No person shall knowingly commit trespass or otherwise secretly or surreptitiously videotape, film, photograph, broadcast, stream, or otherwise record a minor, in a place where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, for the purpose of viewing the private areas of the minor.
(D) No person shall secretly or surreptitiously videotape, film, photograph, or otherwise record another person above, under, or through the clothing being worn by that other person for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, that other person.
(E)(1) Whoever violates this section is guilty of voyeurism.
(2) A violation of division (A) of this section is a misdemeanor of the third degree.
(3) A violation of division (B) of this section is a misdemeanor of the second degree.
(4) A violation of division (D) of this section is a misdemeanor of the first degree.
(5) A violation of division (C) of this section is a felony of the fifth degree.
Last updated February 13, 2023 at 9:32 AM
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 77
cases (34 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: State v. Sipple
State v. Sipple (2021) ohioctapp · cites it 14ד{¶10} Because “surreptitious” is not defined in R.C. 2907.08, we must look to other sources for a definition.”
State v. Huffman (2006) ohioctapp · cites it 9ד08(C); two counts of voyeurism, in violation of R.C. 2907.08(B); 20 counts of pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, in violation of R.”
State v. Goldblum (2014) ohioctapp · cites it 5ד, in violation of R.C. 2907.08(C); one count of Voyeurism relating to R.”
Dardinger v. Dardinger (In re Dardinger) (2017) ohsb · cites it 4דR.C. § 2907.08 — Voyeurism—provides in pertinent part as follows: “(B) No person, for the purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying the person’s self, shall .”
State v. Armstead (2021) ohioctapp · cites it 5דR.C. 2907.08 does not specifically authorize forfeiture for violations under that section.”
State v. J.A.C. (2018) ohioctapp · cites it 4דSpecifically, appellant asserted that the affidavit was defective because it merely averred that appellant had "used his cellphone to take pictures or video of a girl while walking up the stairs in Kings High School" and did not aver that appellant had done so "under or through…”
State v. Schneider (2021) ohioctapp · cites it 8ד08(C), the statute on voyeurism, states: “No person, for the purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying the person’s self, shall * * * surreptitiously invade the privacy of another to videotape, film, photograph, otherwise record, or spy or eavesdrop upon the other person in a…”
State v. Zimmerer (2020) ohioctapp · cites it 8דFacts and Procedural History {¶ 2} On September 24, 2018, a detective with the West Chester Police Department Butler CA2019-10-176 filed a complaint charging Zimmerer with voyeurism in violation of R.C. 2907.08(D), a first- degree misdemeanor.”
State v. Wilson (2011) ohioctapp · cites it 4ד08(D)(1) and (E)(4), and one count of voyeurism, a misdemeanor of the third degree in violation of R.C. 2907.08(A) and (E)(2). {¶ 3} The matter proceeded to a bench trial.”
State v. Webb (2023) ohioctapp · cites it 4ד22-CR-153 on one count of voyeurism in violation of R.C. 2907.08(A), a third-degree misdemeanor, alleged to have occurred on or about February 17, 2022, and one count of tampering with evidence in violation of R.”
State v. Powell (2010) ohioctapp · cites it 4דIt lists specifically that Section 2907.08, which is the Voyeurism. Have you discussed that with your client at all? {¶ 9} “MR.”
Gosden v. Louis (1996) ohioctapp“Voyeurism is a violation of R.C. 2907.08. ' Defendants have argued that, to the extent the letter contained an accusation of criminal behavior, that accusation did not render it libelous per se because the alleged crime was not a crime of moral turpitude.”
State v. Sipple (2021) ohioctapp“{¶10} Because “surreptitious” is not defined in R.C. 2907.08, we must look to other sources for a definition.”
State v. Wilson (2011) ohioctapp“08(D)(1) and (E)(4), and one count of voyeurism, a misdemeanor of the third degree in violation of R.C. 2907.08(A) and (E)(2). {¶ 3} The matter proceeded to a bench trial.”
State v. Webb (2023) ohioctapp“22-CR-153 on one count of voyeurism in violation of R.C. 2907.08(A), a third-degree misdemeanor, alleged to have occurred on or about February 17, 2022, and one count of tampering with evidence in violation of R.”
State v. Powell (2010) ohioctapp“It lists specifically that Section 2907.08, which is the Voyeurism. Have you discussed that with your client at all? {¶ 9} “MR.”
State v. Huffman (2006) ohioctapp“08(C); two counts of voyeurism, in violation of R.C. 2907.08(B); 20 counts of pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, in violation of R.”
State v. Armstead (2021) ohioctapp“R.C. 2907.08 does not specifically authorize forfeiture for violations under that section.”
State v. Goldblum (2014) ohioctapp“, in violation of R.C. 2907.08(C); one count of Voyeurism relating to R.”
State v. Schneider (2021) ohioctapp“08(C), the statute on voyeurism, states: “No person, for the purpose of sexually arousing or gratifying the person’s self, shall * * * surreptitiously invade the privacy of another to videotape, film, photograph, otherwise record, or spy or eavesdrop upon the other person in a…”
State v. Huffman (2006) ohioctapp“08(C); two counts of voyeurism, in violation of R.C. 2907.08(B); 20 counts of pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, in violation of R.”
State v. Sipple (2021) ohioctapp“{¶10} Because “surreptitious” is not defined in R.C. 2907.08, we must look to other sources for a definition.”
State v. Zimmerer (2020) ohioctapp“Facts and Procedural History {¶ 2} On September 24, 2018, a detective with the West Chester Police Department Butler CA2019-10-176 filed a complaint charging Zimmerer with voyeurism in violation of R.C. 2907.08(D), a first- degree misdemeanor.”
State v. J.A.C. (2018) ohioctapp“Specifically, appellant asserted that the affidavit was defective because it merely averred that appellant had "used his cellphone to take pictures or video of a girl while walking up the stairs in Kings High School" and did not aver that appellant had done so "under or through…”
State v. Webb (2023) ohioctapp“22-CR-153 on one count of voyeurism in violation of R.C. 2907.08(A), a third-degree misdemeanor, alleged to have occurred on or about February 17, 2022, and one count of tampering with evidence in violation of R.”
State v. Wilson (2011) ohioctapp“08(D)(1) and (E)(4), and one count of voyeurism, a misdemeanor of the third degree in violation of R.C. 2907.08(A) and (E)(2). {¶ 3} The matter proceeded to a bench trial.”
State v. Wilson (2011) ohioctapp“08(D)(1) and (E)(4), and one count of voyeurism, a misdemeanor of the third degree in violation of R.C. 2907.08(A) and (E)(2). {¶ 3} The matter proceeded to a bench trial.”
State v. Huffman (2006) ohioctapp“08(C); two counts of voyeurism, in violation of R.C. 2907.08(B); 20 counts of pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, in violation of R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2907.08(E)(1)(3) — 1 case
State v. Armstead (2021) ohioctapp“R.C. 2907.08 does not specifically authorize forfeiture for violations under that section.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.