A. It shall be unlawful for any person to enter upon the property of another and secretly or furtively peep, spy or attempt to peep or spy into or through a window, door or other aperture of any building, structure, or other enclosure of any nature occupied or intended for occupancy as a dwelling, whether or not such building, structure or enclosure is permanently situated or transportable and whether or not such occupancy is permanent or temporary, or to do the same, without just cause, upon property owned by him and leased or rented to another under circumstances that would violate the occupant's reasonable expectation of privacy.
B. It shall be unlawful for any person to use a peephole or other aperture to secretly or furtively peep, spy or attempt to peep or spy into a restroom, dressing room, locker room, hotel room, motel room, tanning bed, tanning booth, bedroom or other location or enclosure for the purpose of viewing any nonconsenting person who is totally nude, clad in undergarments, or in a state of undress exposing the genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breast and the circumstances are such that the person would otherwise have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
C. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a lawful criminal investigation or a correctional official or local or regional jail official conducting surveillance for security purposes or during an investigation of alleged misconduct involving a person committed to the Department of Corrections or to a local or regional jail.
D. As used in this section, "peephole" means any hole, crack or other similar opening through which a person can see.
E. A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Code 1950, § 18.1-174; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1992, c. 520; 1999, c. 351; 2003, cc. 81, 87.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
9 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case:
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 525 S.E.2d 9 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 525 S.E.2d 9 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 6× “2-387, and peeping into a dwelling, in violation of Code § 18.2-130, Paul L. Copeland contends (1) that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of indecent exposure, (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of window peeping, and (3) that…”
Morales v. Commonwealth, 525 S.E.2d 23 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 6× “2-387, and peeping into a dwelling, in *543 violation of Code § 18.2-130, Henry D. Morales contends that the evidence was insufficient to support either conviction.”
Husske v. Commonwealth, 448 S.E.2d 331 (Va. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 4× “The officer arrested Husske for furtively peeping into a dwelling in violation of Code § 18.2-130. Two days after his arrest, Husske contacted the County of Henrico Area Mental Health and Retardation Services.”
Jowell Travis Legendre v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 6× “Alsberry does not specify what section of the Code the defendant violated in “being a Peeping Tom,” but appellant likely violated Code § 18.2-130, entitled “Peeping or spying into dwelling or enclosure.”
Brian Anthony Joe v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 4× “Joe was subsequently indicted by a grand jury on two counts of statutory burglary, seven counts of peeping in violation of Code § 18.2-130, and one count each of attempted unlawful filming of a minor, destruction of property, and possession of a controlled substance.”
Chickan Lamont Carter v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 4× “2-89, and misdemeanor peeping, in violation of Code § 18.2-130. On appeal, Carter contends that the trial court erred when it determined he possessed the intent required for a conviction of breaking and entering a dwelling with the intent to commit larceny.”
James Stearn, s/k/a James Gilbert Stearn v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 4× “James Stearn (“Stearn”) was convicted in a jury trial of felony third or subsequent offense peeping into an occupied dwelling in violation of Code §§ 18.2-130 and 18.2-67.5:1. On appeal, appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.”
Darrin Mark Robertson v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 2× “Following a jury trial on two misdemeanor charges, Darrin Robertson appeals his convictions for peeping or spying into a structure occupied as a dwelling, in violation of Code § 18.2-130, and attempted unlawful creation of an image of another, in violation of Code §§ 18.”
Darrin Mark Robertson v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2023).
“In 2021, Robertson’s probation officer filed a major violation report alleging that Robertson had been arrested on two new charges: peeping into a dwelling, in violation of Code § 18.2-130(A), and unlawfully filming a nude person without consent, in violation of Code § 18.”
Darrin Mark Robertson v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2024).
“Following a jury trial on two misdemeanor charges, Darrin Robertson appeals his convictions for peeping or spying into a structure occupied as a dwelling, in violation of Code § 18.2-130, and attempted unlawful creation of an image of another, in violation of Code §§ 18.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-130(A) — 4 cases
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 525 S.E.2d 9 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
“2-387, and peeping into a dwelling, in violation of Code § 18.2-130, Paul L. Copeland contends (1) that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of indecent exposure, (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of window peeping, and (3) that…”
Morales v. Commonwealth, 525 S.E.2d 23 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
“2-387, and peeping into a dwelling, in *543 violation of Code § 18.2-130, Henry D. Morales contends that the evidence was insufficient to support either conviction.”
James Stearn, s/k/a James Gilbert Stearn v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
“James Stearn (“Stearn”) was convicted in a jury trial of felony third or subsequent offense peeping into an occupied dwelling in violation of Code §§ 18.2-130 and 18.2-67.5:1. On appeal, appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.”
Darrin Mark Robertson v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2023).
“In 2021, Robertson’s probation officer filed a major violation report alleging that Robertson had been arrested on two new charges: peeping into a dwelling, in violation of Code § 18.2-130(A), and unlawfully filming a nude person without consent, in violation of Code § 18.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-130(E) — 2 cases
Jowell Travis Legendre v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2022).
“Alsberry does not specify what section of the Code the defendant violated in “being a Peeping Tom,” but appellant likely violated Code § 18.2-130, entitled “Peeping or spying into dwelling or enclosure.”
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.