South Dakota
South Dakota Surveillance Camera Laws (2026 Guide)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 16, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 16, 2026. · 12 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
South Dakota allows surveillance cameras on your own property but prohibits installing recording devices in private places without consent under SDCL 22-21-1. For audio, South Dakota follows a one-party consent rule under SDCL 23A-35A-20, meaning at least one party to a conversation must consent before you record.
Overview of South Dakota Surveillance Camera Laws
South Dakota does not have a single, comprehensive surveillance camera statute. Instead, multiple state laws work together to regulate how and where cameras can be used. The primary statutes include SDCL 22-21-1 (trespassing to eavesdrop and unauthorized surveillance devices), SDCL 22-21-3 (window peeking), SDCL 22-21-4 (visual recording without consent), SDCL 23A-35A-20 (eavesdropping and recording communications), and SDCL 50-15 (drone regulations).
The central legal concept running through all of these provisions is the "reasonable expectation of privacy." Surveillance cameras are generally legal in South Dakota when used in areas where people do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as public streets, open front yards, and common areas of businesses. Recording becomes a criminal offense when cameras capture images or audio in private spaces without the consent of the person being recorded.
Understanding these laws is essential for South Dakota homeowners installing security systems, employers considering workplace monitoring, and residents who want to protect their own privacy rights.
Home Security Camera Laws in South Dakota
South Dakota law permits homeowners to install security cameras on their own property for purposes such as deterring burglary, monitoring deliveries, and keeping an eye on their home while traveling. No state law requires homeowners to register security cameras or obtain a permit before installation.
Where You Can Place Home Security Cameras
You can legally place cameras in the following areas of your property:
- Front door and porch areas for monitoring visitors and package deliveries
- Driveways and garages to record vehicle activity and deter theft
- Backyards to monitor your own property and outdoor spaces
- Common living areas inside your home, such as living rooms and kitchens
- Exterior walls aimed at your own property boundaries and public-facing areas
Where You Cannot Place Home Security Cameras
Under SDCL 22-21-1, it is a Class 1 misdemeanor to install any device for observing, photographing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting sounds or events in any private place without the consent of the person entitled to privacy there. Cameras become illegal when placed in areas where others have a reasonable expectation of privacy:
- Bathrooms and restrooms in your home where guests or residents expect privacy
- Guest bedrooms where visitors are staying
- Pointed directly into a neighbor's windows or interior living spaces
- Any area where someone is undressing or engaged in private activities
The statute specifically provides an exception for law enforcement officers and those acting under their direction while performing lawful duties.
Ring Doorbells and Smart Cameras
Video doorbells and smart security cameras such as Ring, Nest, and Arlo are legal in South Dakota. These devices typically record your own porch and the public sidewalk or street in front of your home. Since these areas are in public view, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, and recording is permitted.
However, if a doorbell camera captures a wide angle that includes a neighbor's interior spaces through their windows, this could raise privacy concerns under South Dakota law. Position your smart cameras to focus primarily on your own property and public areas.
Audio Recording on Home Security Cameras
Many modern security cameras include microphone capabilities. In South Dakota, audio recording is governed separately from video recording under SDCL 23A-35A-20. South Dakota follows a one-party consent rule, meaning at least one party to a conversation must consent for the recording to be legal.
If you are present and part of a conversation being captured by your security camera, you satisfy the one-party consent requirement by consenting to your own recording. However, if your outdoor camera picks up conversations between people passing by on the sidewalk and you are not part of those conversations, recording their audio without the consent of any participant could violate SDCL 23A-35A-20.
The safest approach is to either disable audio recording on exterior cameras or post visible signage indicating that audio and video recording is in progress. This way, anyone who continues a conversation within range of the camera has arguably provided implied consent.
Workplace Surveillance Camera Laws in South Dakota
South Dakota does not have a specific statute governing workplace video surveillance. Employers in the state generally follow federal law, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and common-law privacy principles when installing cameras at work.
What Employers Can Do
Employers may install video surveillance cameras in the following areas:
- Lobbies, hallways, and reception areas for building security
- Parking lots to protect employees and company property
- Warehouses and production floors to monitor operations and safety
- Cash register areas to prevent theft and fraud
- Loading docks and entry points for security purposes
What Employers Cannot Do
Even without a specific state statute addressing workplace video, employers face restrictions based on privacy tort law and federal guidelines:
- Restrooms and changing areas are always off-limits for surveillance
- Break rooms may raise privacy concerns depending on the circumstances
- Union meeting areas are protected under the National Labor Relations Act
- Private offices where employees have a reasonable expectation of privacy may require notice
Audio Surveillance at Work
Employers who use cameras with audio recording capabilities must comply with SDCL 23A-35A-20. Since South Dakota is a one-party consent state, an employer cannot record private conversations between employees unless at least one party to the conversation has consented. The best practice for employers is to provide written notice to all employees that audio and video surveillance is in use and to obtain signed acknowledgments.
Employee Notification
While South Dakota does not require employers to notify employees of video-only surveillance, providing notice is strongly recommended. A clear workplace surveillance policy should outline where cameras are located, whether audio is recorded, how footage is stored, who has access to recordings, and how long recordings are retained. This transparency helps employers avoid invasion of privacy claims.
Hidden Cameras and Voyeurism Laws
South Dakota takes hidden camera offenses seriously. The state addresses voyeurism and unauthorized surveillance through several provisions under Title 22, Chapter 21 of the South Dakota Codified Laws.
SDCL 22-21-1: Unauthorized Surveillance Devices
SDCL 22-21-1 makes it a crime for any person to:
- Trespass on property with the intent to subject anyone to eavesdropping or other surveillance in a private place
- Install in any private place, without the consent of the person entitled to privacy there, any device for observing, photographing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting sounds or events
- Use any such unauthorized installation
Drone-specific surveillance is addressed separately, in SDCL 50-15-5 (photographing or recording a person in a private place by drone) and SDCL 50-15-6 (landing a drone on someone's property without consent).
A violation of SDCL 22-21-1 is a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to 1 year in the county jail and a fine of up to $2,000 under SDCL 22-6-2.
SDCL 22-21-3: Window Peeking
Under SDCL 22-21-3, no person may enter the private property of another and peek in the door or window of any inhabited building or structure located on that property without having lawful purpose with the owner or occupant. A violation is a Class 1 misdemeanor.
This "peeping Tom" statute applies to physical intrusion and observation, not just electronic surveillance. It protects residents from people who come onto their property to look through windows or doors.
SDCL 22-21-4: Visual Recording Without Consent
SDCL 22-21-4 prohibits the use or dissemination of any visual recording or photographic device to photograph or visually record another person without clothing or under or through clothing, without the consent or knowledge of that person, with the intent to self-gratify, harass, or embarrass and invade the privacy of that person. Unlike SDCL 22-21-1, this statute applies regardless of location and does not require a reasonable expectation of privacy.
This statute specifically targets "upskirting" and similar invasive recording behaviors.
Penalties for Hidden Camera Offenses
| Violation | Statute | Classification | Max Jail/Prison | Max Fine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unauthorized surveillance device | SDCL 22-21-1 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Window peeking | SDCL 22-21-3 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Visual recording without consent (adult victim) | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Visual recording without consent (victim 17 or younger, offender 21+) | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 6 Felony | Up to 2 years | $4,000 |
| Subsequent visual recording or dissemination violation | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 6 Felony | Up to 2 years | $4,000 |
| Digitally fabricated (deepfake) sexual or nude imagery | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 5 Felony | Up to 5 years | $10,000 |
Audio Recording Laws (One-Party Consent)
South Dakota is a one-party consent state for audio recording. SDCL 23A-35A-20 governs the interception and recording of communications.
What the Law Says
Under SDCL 23A-35A-20, a person is guilty of a Class 5 felony if they are not a sender or receiver of a communication and intentionally overhear or record the communication by means of an eavesdropping device without the consent of either a sender or receiver. The same rule applies to in-person conversations: a person who is not present during a conversation is guilty of a Class 5 felony if they intentionally overhear or record that conversation by means of an eavesdropping device without the consent of any party to the conversation.
What One-Party Consent Means in Practice
If you are part of a conversation, whether in person, on the phone, or through any electronic means, you can legally record it without telling the other participants. You do not need to inform anyone else that the recording is taking place, because your own consent as a party to the conversation satisfies the legal requirement.
However, you cannot place a hidden recording device to capture conversations between other people when you are not present and no party to the conversation has consented. Doing so constitutes illegal eavesdropping under South Dakota law.
Key Definitions Under SDCL 23A-35A-1
SDCL 23A-35A-1 provides important definitions that apply to the recording laws:
- Eavesdropping device: Any electronic, mechanical, or other apparatus intentionally used to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication
- Oral communication: Any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that the communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying that expectation
- Wire communication: Any communication made through facilities for transmission by wire, cable, radio, or other connection between origin and reception points
- Electronic communication: Any transfer of signs, signals, writings, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature transmitted by wire, radio, electromagnetic, electronic, or optical system
Penalties for Illegal Recording
Violating SDCL 23A-35A-20 is a Class 5 felony under SDCL 22-6-1. This is one of the most severe penalties in the country for illegal recording. The maximum penalties include:
- Up to 5 years imprisonment in a state correctional facility
- A fine of up to $10,000
This heavy penalty underscores how seriously South Dakota treats unauthorized recording and eavesdropping.
Interstate Recording Considerations
If you are communicating with someone located in a state that requires all-party consent (such as California, Florida, or Illinois), you must comply with the stricter law when interstate communications are involved. Always check the recording laws of the other party's state before recording a phone call or video chat.
Neighbor Disputes Over Security Cameras
Disagreements between neighbors about security cameras are increasingly common in South Dakota. State law provides guidance on where the line falls between legitimate security and unlawful surveillance.
When a Neighbor's Camera Is Legal
A neighbor's security camera is generally legal if it:
- Is pointed at the neighbor's own property
- Captures public areas like sidewalks and streets
- Records only video (without audio) of areas in public view
- Does not deliberately peer into your windows or private enclosed spaces
When a Neighbor's Camera May Be Illegal
A neighbor's camera may violate South Dakota law if it:
- Is deliberately aimed to look inside your home through windows
- Records your fully fenced backyard from an elevated position, capturing areas hidden from street view
- Records audio of your private conversations without your consent
- Is a hidden camera placed on your property without your knowledge, which would violate SDCL 22-21-1
Steps to Resolve a Camera Dispute
-
Talk to your neighbor. Many disputes arise from cameras that were not intentionally aimed at your property. A polite conversation can often resolve the issue.
-
Document the situation. If the camera clearly invades your privacy, take photos or video showing the camera's position and what it captures.
-
Send a written request. Ask your neighbor in writing to adjust the camera angle or position.
-
Contact local authorities. If you believe a neighbor is using a camera to engage in voyeurism or to record your private activities, file a police report. Violations of SDCL 22-21-1 and SDCL 22-21-4 carry criminal penalties.
-
Consult an attorney. You may have grounds for a civil invasion of privacy lawsuit if a neighbor's camera is deliberately aimed to capture your private activities.
Stalking and Harassment Through Surveillance
If a neighbor uses surveillance cameras as part of a pattern of harassment, South Dakota's stalking law under SDCL 22-19A-1 may apply. This statute prohibits willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly harassing another person by means of any verbal, electronic, digital media, mechanical, telegraphic, or written communication. Stalking is a Class 1 misdemeanor for a first offense. A second or subsequent conviction within ten years is a Class 6 felony, punishable by up to 2 years in prison and a $4,000 fine.
Physical Solutions
You can also take steps to block a camera's view of your property:
- Install privacy fencing along your property line
- Plant tall hedges or trees to create natural barriers
- Use window film or curtains to block interior views
- Install your own cameras to document any intrusive behavior
Nanny Cam Laws in South Dakota
Nanny cameras, or hidden cameras used to monitor caregivers in your home, are subject to specific considerations under South Dakota law.
Legal Requirements for Nanny Cams
Under SDCL 22-21-1, installing a recording device in a private place without the consent of the person entitled to privacy there is a Class 1 misdemeanor. While your home is your private property, areas designated for a caregiver's private use (such as a live-in nanny's bedroom or bathroom) are considered places where the caregiver has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The safest legal approach is to inform caregivers that cameras are present in your home. Written disclosure eliminates any question about consent.
Where You Can Place a Nanny Cam
- Living rooms and family rooms where childcare takes place
- Kitchens and dining areas
- Playrooms and nurseries (in common areas)
- Hallways and entryways
Where You Cannot Place a Nanny Cam
- Bathrooms used by the caregiver
- Bedrooms designated for the caregiver's private use (for live-in nannies)
- Any room where the caregiver changes clothes or has a reasonable expectation of privacy
Audio on Nanny Cams
If your nanny cam records audio, South Dakota's one-party consent law under SDCL 23A-35A-20 applies. Since you are not present during the conversations being recorded, and no party to those conversations has consented, recording audio without the caregiver's knowledge could violate the eavesdropping statute. Because illegal eavesdropping is a Class 5 felony in South Dakota, this is a particularly important consideration.
The safest approach is to either disable audio recording on your nanny cam or inform the caregiver in writing that audio and video recording takes place in the home.
Drone Surveillance Laws in South Dakota
South Dakota has addressed drone surveillance through provisions in both the invasions of privacy chapter and a dedicated drone statute.
SDCL 50-15-5 and 50-15-6: Drone Privacy Protections
Under SDCL 50-15-5, it is a Class 1 misdemeanor to intentionally use a drone to photograph, record, or otherwise observe another person in a private place where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Under SDCL 50-15-6, it is a separate Class 1 misdemeanor to land a drone on another person's property without the owner's consent, except in cases of forced landing.
SDCL 50-15: Drone Operations
SDCL Chapter 50-15 establishes additional regulations for drone operations in South Dakota. Key provisions include:
- Drone operators must comply with all applicable federal regulations
- Under SDCL 50-15-3, no person may operate a drone over the grounds of a prison, correctional facility, jail, juvenile detention facility, or military facility without authorization from the administrator of that facility. A violation is a Class 6 felony, punishable by up to 2 years in prison and a $4,000 fine under SDCL 22-6-1
- Under SDCL 50-15-4, using a drone to deliver contraband or controlled substances to a state prison or other correctional facility is a Class 6 felony, in addition to the penalty for the principal offense
Exceptions to Drone Surveillance Restrictions
- Law enforcement officers acting under lawful authority
- Surveying your own property with a drone
- Emergency situations involving forced landing
- Operations authorized by the facility administrator (for restricted areas)
Penalties Summary for Surveillance Violations in South Dakota
| Violation | Statute | Classification | Max Jail/Prison | Max Fine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unauthorized surveillance device in private place | SDCL 22-21-1 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Drone surveillance of private place | SDCL 50-15-5 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Drone landing without consent | SDCL 50-15-6 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Window peeking on private property | SDCL 22-21-3 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Visual recording without consent (adult) | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Visual recording without consent (minor victim, adult offender) | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 6 Felony | Up to 2 years | $4,000 |
| Subsequent visual recording or dissemination violation | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 6 Felony | Up to 2 years | $4,000 |
| Digitally fabricated (deepfake) sexual or nude imagery | SDCL 22-21-4 | Class 5 Felony | Up to 5 years | $10,000 |
| Illegal eavesdropping or recording | SDCL 23A-35A-20 | Class 5 Felony | Up to 5 years | $10,000 |
| Stalking (first offense) | SDCL 22-19A-1 | Class 1 Misdemeanor | Up to 1 year | $2,000 |
| Stalking (second offense within 10 years) | SDCL 22-19A-1 | Class 6 Felony | Up to 2 years | $4,000 |
| Drone over correctional or military facility | SDCL 50-15-3 | Class 6 Felony | Up to 2 years | $4,000 |
| Drone delivery of contraband to facility | SDCL 50-15-4 | Class 6 Felony | Up to 2 years | $4,000 |
HOA and Local Regulations
In addition to state law, homeowners in South Dakota may be subject to additional surveillance camera rules imposed by their homeowners association (HOA) or local municipality.
HOA Camera Rules
South Dakota does not have a statewide law governing HOA security camera policies. However, your HOA's covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) may include rules about camera placement, visibility, and positioning. Common HOA restrictions include requirements that cameras be aesthetically discreet, prohibitions on cameras aimed at common areas managed by the HOA, and rules about notification to the association before installation.
Before installing cameras in an HOA community, review your governing documents or contact your HOA board for guidance. Local ordinances may supersede HOA bylaws when there is a conflict, especially regarding public health and safety concerns.
Local Ordinances
Some South Dakota cities and counties may have additional regulations regarding security cameras, particularly for commercial properties. Check with your local city hall or county clerk's office for any applicable ordinances. No statewide registration or permit requirement exists for residential security cameras.
Related South Dakota Camera and Privacy Laws
- South Dakota Recording Laws covers the consent rule that governs camera audio in South Dakota.
- South Dakota Security Camera Recording Rules explains the recording-law side of camera use.
- South Dakota Biometric Privacy Laws addresses facial recognition and biometric data.
- South Dakota Ring Doorbell Laws covers video doorbell rules in South Dakota.
Common Camera Questions
These national guides answer the most common surveillance camera questions:
- HOA Security Camera Rules
- Neighbor Security Camera Laws
- Nanny Cam Laws
- Workplace Surveillance Camera Laws
- Landlord Security Camera Laws
More South Dakota Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Are home security cameras legal in South Dakota?
Yes. South Dakota homeowners can legally install security cameras on their own property. Cameras may record outdoor areas such as driveways, porches, and yards, as well as common indoor areas like living rooms and kitchens. However, under SDCL 22-21-1, installing any device for observing, photographing, or recording in a private place without the consent of the person entitled to privacy there is a Class 1 misdemeanor. Cameras cannot be placed in bathrooms, guest bedrooms, or aimed directly into a neighbor's home.
Can my neighbor legally point a security camera at my house in South Dakota?
It depends on what the camera captures. A neighbor's camera may legally record their own property and public areas like sidewalks or streets, even if your home appears in the background. However, if the camera is deliberately aimed to look inside your windows or into a fully fenced backyard where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, it could violate SDCL 22-21-1 or SDCL 22-21-4. You can ask the neighbor to adjust the camera angle, file a police report if the recording appears illegal, or consult an attorney about a civil invasion of privacy claim.
Is it legal to use a nanny cam in South Dakota?
Yes, you can use a nanny cam in common areas of your home such as living rooms, kitchens, and playrooms. Cameras cannot be placed in bathrooms or private bedrooms used by the caregiver. If your nanny cam records audio, you must comply with the one-party consent rule under SDCL 23A-35A-20. Since you are not present during the recorded conversations, the safest approach is to inform the caregiver about both audio and video recording and to disable audio if you do not have the caregiver's consent.
Can my employer record me at work with security cameras in South Dakota?
South Dakota does not have a specific law addressing workplace video surveillance. Employers may generally install video cameras in common work areas such as lobbies, hallways, production floors, and parking lots. Cameras are prohibited in restrooms, changing areas, and other spaces where employees have a reasonable expectation of privacy. If cameras record audio, employers must comply with SDCL 23A-35A-20, which requires at least one party to a conversation to consent to the recording.
What are the penalties for illegal surveillance in South Dakota?
Penalties vary by offense. Installing an unauthorized surveillance device in a private place under SDCL 22-21-1 is a Class 1 misdemeanor with up to 1 year in jail and a $2,000 fine. Visual recording without consent under SDCL 22-21-4 is also a Class 1 misdemeanor, but becomes a Class 6 felony (up to 2 years and $4,000 fine) if the victim is 17 or younger and the offender is 21 or older, and any repeat violation of the recording or disclosure provisions is a Class 6 felony regardless of age. Creating or sharing digitally fabricated (deepfake) sexual or nude imagery of an identifiable person under SDCL 22-21-4 is a Class 5 felony, up to 5 years and a $10,000 fine, with no age requirement for the victim or offender. Illegal eavesdropping under SDCL 23A-35A-20 is a Class 5 felony, carrying up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
Updates
Corrected the penalty for flying a drone over a South Dakota prison, jail, juvenile detention facility or military facility: SDCL 50-15-3 makes it a Class 6 felony (up to 2 years and a $4,000 fine), not a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Reattributed the drone-surveillance prohibitions from SDCL 22-21-1 (which does not cover drones) to the correct sections, SDCL 50-15-5 and 50-15-6, and added the new SL 2026 ch. 104 penalty tier for digitally fabricated (deepfake) sexual or nude imagery and repeat-offense felony elevation under SDCL 22-21-4.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the SDCL 22-21-4 description: the statute's upskirting-type prohibition applies regardless of location and has no reasonable-expectation-of-privacy element, unlike SDCL 22-21-1.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 22-21: INVASIONS OF PRIVACY
§ 22-21-1Eavesdropping--Privacy--Misdemeanor.In forcecited in 14 of our articles
No person may, except as authorized by law: (1) Trespass on property with intent to subject anyone to eavesdropping or other surveillance in a private place; or (2) Install in any private place, without the consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy there, any device for observing, photographing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting sounds or events in such place, or uses any such unauthorized installation. A person who violates this section is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Subdivision (2) does not apply to law enforcement officers, or to those acting under the direction of a law enforcement officer, while engaged in the performance of the officer's lawful duties.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Olson (South Dakota Supreme Court 1981, 305 N.W.2d 852)“…9,1980, appellant was arraigned on four counts of violating SDCL 22-21-1(1) 1 and one count of viol…”
- State v. Reif (South Dakota Supreme Court 1992, 490 N.W.2d 511)“…d to "reasonably satisfy" the court that appellant violated SDCL 22-21-1(1) and that these activities were suffi…”
- Gantvoort v. Ranschau (South Dakota Supreme Court 2022, 2022 S.D. 22)“…Further, placing such a device is a class one misdemeanor. SDCL 22-21-1(2), provides in part that:…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Audio Recording Laws, South Dakota Dashcam Laws, South Dakota Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws
§ 22-21-4Prohibited recording or manipulated image--Penalty.In forcecited in 8 of our articles
No individual, without the consent or knowledge of the individual depicted or recorded, and with the intent to self-gratify or alarm, annoy, embarrass, harass, invade the privacy of, threaten, or cause emotional, financial, physical, psychological, or reputational harm to that individual, may: (1) Intentionally use any device to photograph or visually record the individual without clothing or under or through the clothing, or with a third individual depicted in a sexual act, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, the individual; (2) Intentionally disclose, disseminate, distribute, sell, or use, by any means, any recording or photograph described in subdivision (1); or (3) Knowingly and intentionally create, disclose, disseminate, distribute, or sell, by any means, digitally fabricated material depicting the identifiable individual: (a) In a state of nudity, as defined in § 22-24A-2, such that an ordinary person viewing the material would conclude that the depiction is of the identifiable individual in such a state of nudity; or (b) Engaging in sexual contact, sexual intercourse, deviant sexual activity, or sexually explicit conduct such that an…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2006
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Blair (South Dakota Supreme Court 2006, 721 N.W.2d 55)“…w peeking under SDCL 22- 21-3, or with a misdemeanor under SDCL 22-21-4 for taking pictures of someone in 17.…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, South Dakota Laws on Recording in Public, South Dakota Video Recording Laws
§ 22-21-3Window peeking on private property of another--Violation as misdemeanor.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
No person may enter the private property of another and peek in the door or window of any inhabited building or structure located thereon, without having lawful purpose with the owner or occupant thereof. A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2006
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Blair (South Dakota Supreme Court 2006, 721 N.W.2d 55)“…k to provide such predators with these images. 18. SDCL 22-21-3 provides: “No person may enter the priv…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 50-15: DRONES
§ 50-15-5Eavesdropping--Violation of privacy--Misdemeanor.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
No person may, except as authorized by law, intentionally use a drone to photograph, record, or otherwise observe another person in a private place where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. A person who violates this section is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. This section does not apply to: (1) Law enforcement officers, or to those acting under the direction of a law enforcement officer, while engaged in the performance of the officer's lawful duties; (2) A drone operator operating a drone for bona fide business or bona fide government purposes who unintentionally or incidentally photographs, records, or otherwise observes another person in a private place; or (3) A designated emergency management worker operating a drone within the scope of the worker's duties.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Also relied on in: South Dakota Drone Laws: Privacy, Trespass, and Prison Rules
§ 50-15-6Trespassing--Affirmative defense--Misdemeanor.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
No person may, except as authorized by law, land a drone on the real or personal property or the waters of a landowner who owns the real property beneath the water body, without the landowner's consent. It is an affirmative defense if the landing was a forced landing or if the landing was caused by a technical malfunction, but in either case, the operator of the drone remains liable for any damage resulting from the landing. A person who violates this section is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 22-6: AUTHORIZED PUNISHMENTS
§ 22-6-2Misdemeanor classes and penalties--Restitution--Misdemeanor when no penalty imposed.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
Misdemeanors are divided into two classes which are distinguished from each other by the following maximum penalties which are authorized upon conviction: (1) Class 1 misdemeanor: one year imprisonment in a county jail or two thousand dollars fine, or both; (2) Class 2 misdemeanor: thirty days imprisonment in a county jail or five hundred dollars fine, or both. The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant who has been found guilty of a misdemeanor, shall order, in addition to the sentence that is imposed pursuant to the provisions of this section, that the defendant make restitution to any victim in accordance with the provisions of chapter 23A-28. Except in Titles 1 to 20, inclusive, 22, 25 to 28, inclusive, 32 to 36, inclusive, 40 to 42, inclusive, 47 to 54, inclusive, and 58 to 62, inclusive, if the performance of an act is prohibited by a statute, and no penalty for the violation of such statute is imposed by a statute, the doing of such act is a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 39 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Feiok (South Dakota Supreme Court 1985, 364 N.W.2d 536)“…t of the penalty imposed under SDCL 32-22-55 might warrant. SDCL 22-6-2(2) fixes the maximum penalty for a Clas…”
- State v. Auen (South Dakota Supreme Court 1984, 342 N.W.2d 236)“…imprisonment in a county jail or $100 fine, or both. See SDCL 22-6-2. The South Dakota Unified Judicial Syst…”
- State v. Beck (South Dakota Supreme Court 2000, 619 N.W.2d 247)“…ne of one thousand dollars. See SDCL 22-42-6 (Supp.1997); SDCL 22-6-2(1). After plea bargaining, Beck entered…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Windshield Mounting Laws (2026 Guide)
§ 22-6-1Felony classes and penalties--Restitution--Habitual criminal sentences.In forcecited in 8 of our articles
Except as otherwise provided by law, felonies are divided into the following nine classes which are distinguished from each other by the following maximum penalties which are authorized upon conviction: (1) Class A felony: death or life imprisonment in a state correctional facility. A lesser sentence than death or life imprisonment may not be given for a Class A felony. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (2) Class B felony: life imprisonment in a state correctional facility. A lesser sentence may not be given for a Class B felony. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (3) Class C felony: life imprisonment in a state correctional facility. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (4) Class 1 felony: fifty years imprisonment in a state correctional facility. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (5) Class 2 felony: twenty-five years imprisonment in a state correctional facility. In addition, a fine of fifty thousand dollars may be imposed; (6) Class 3 felony: fifteen years imprisonment in a state correctional facility.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 145 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. Weiker (1983) read SDCL 22-6-1 Class 1 felony penalty, then life imprisonment, as a maximum rather than a mandatory term, and struck the resulting life sentences as disproportionate under the state constitution. State v. Chipps (2016) applied the section class maximums as the yardstick in gross disproportionality review.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Moeller (South Dakota Supreme Court 1996, 548 N.W.2d 465)“…do so, the conviction for murder in the first degree under SDCL 22-6-1 would be life imprisonment in the state…”
- State v. Weiker (South Dakota Supreme Court 1983, 342 N.W.2d 7)✓A man with three prior burglary convictions drew life without parole on three drug distribution counts as a habitual offender; the court read SDCL 22-6-1(2) as fixing life as the maximum, not a mandatory, Class 1 felony penalty and struck the sentences as disproportionate.
- State v. Rice (South Dakota Supreme Court 2016, 2016 S.D. 18)✓Rice organized a robbery that ended in a fatal shooting and received 80 years with 20 suspended for first-degree manslaughter; the court used the life maximum SDCL 22-6-1 sets for a Class C felony as its yardstick and found the term not grossly disproportionate.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Expungement Laws: Arrest Records, Suspended Imposition, and What You Can Clear, How Many Years for Second Degree Murder? Sentences by State (2026), South Dakota AI Meeting Recording Laws (2026)
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 22-19A: STALKING
§ 22-19A-1Stalking--Violation as misdemeanor--Second or subsequent offense a felony.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
No person may: (1) Willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follow or harass another person; (2) Make a credible threat to another person with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear of death or great bodily injury; or (3) Willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly harass another person by means of any verbal, electronic, digital media, mechanical, telegraphic, or written communication. A violation of this section constitutes the crime of stalking. Stalking is a Class 1 misdemeanor. However, any second or subsequent conviction occurring within ten years of a prior conviction under this section is a Class 6 felony. Any conviction for, or plea of guilty to, an offense in another state which, if committed in this state, would be a violation of this section and occurring within ten years prior to the date of the violation being charged, shall be used to determine if the violation being charged is a second or subsequent offense.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-26 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 23 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. McGill rejected a vagueness challenge to SDCL 22-19A-1 and upheld a stalking conviction, reading "repeatedly" and "maliciously" by their common usage. Schaefer Ex Rel. S.S. v. Liechti applied the section to sustain a protection order where repeated watching, following, and threats formed a course of conduct.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. McGill (South Dakota Supreme Court 1995, 536 N.W.2d 89)✓A man who for years phoned, wrote threatening letters to and followed a woman was convicted of stalking on three letters received days after the statute took effect; the court affirmed and rejected his claim that maliciously and repeatedly made 22-19A-1 vague.
- State v. Asmussen (South Dakota Supreme Court 2006, 713 N.W.2d 580)✓A man under a no contact protection order placed dozens of calls to his former partner and left threatening voice mail; the court affirmed his felony stalking conviction, holding the order need not warn of the felony penalty or repeat the wording of 22-19A-1(3).
- Schaefer Ex Rel. S.S. v. Liechti (South Dakota Supreme Court 2006, 711 N.W.2d 257)✓A man watched neighbor children through binoculars while they swam, drove past their home 35 times in one day, chased them in his pickup and told officials he could have used a shotgun; the court affirmed a stalking protection order under 22-19A-1(1) and (2).
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Employee Monitoring Laws: Workplace Surveillance and Social Media (2026), South Dakota GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026)
South Dakota Codified Laws, Chapter 23A-35A: INTERCEPTION OF WIRE, ELECTRONIC, OR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
§ 23A-35A-1Definition of terms.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
Terms used in this chapter mean: (1) "Aggrieved person," a person who was a party to any intercepted wire, electronic, or oral communication or a person against whom the interception was directed; (2) "Attorney general," the attorney general of the State of South Dakota; (3) "Chapter 119 of the United States Code," Chapter 119 of Part I of Title 18, United States Code, being Public Law 90-351, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968; (4) "Communications common carrier," the meaning given to the term, common carrier, by section 153 of Title 47 of the United States Code; (5) "Contents," with respect to any wire, electronic, or oral communication, any information concerning the identity of the parties to the communication or the existence, substance, purport, or meaning of that communication; (6) "Eavesdropping device," any electronic, mechanical, or other apparatus which is intentionally used to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication other than: (a) Any telephone, telegraph instrument, or electronic communication device, equipment, or facility, or any component thereof, (i) furnished to the subscriber or user by a communications common carrier in…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2002
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Owens (South Dakota Supreme Court 2002, 643 N.W.2d 735)“…ion was a private "oral conversation" within the meaning of SDCL 23A-35A-1(10). [7] Owens argues that the unautho…”
- State v. Woods (South Dakota Supreme Court 1985, 361 N.W.2d 620)“…was illegally “intercepted,” as those terms are defined by SDCL 23A-35A-1(2) and (3). 1 SDCL 23A-35A…”
- State v. Iverson (South Dakota Supreme Court 1985, 364 N.W.2d 518)“…es justifying such expecta tion[.]” (Emphasis added.) SDCL 23A-35A-1(2). Disburg’s failure to obtain…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 23A-35A-20Overhearing or recording communications, conversations, or jury deliberations by means of eavesdropping device as felony.In forcecited in 17 of our articles
Except as provided in § 23A-35A-21, a person is guilty of a Class 5 felony who is not: (1) A sender or receiver of a communication who intentionally and by means of an eavesdropping device overhears or records a communication, or aids, authorizes, employs, procures, or permits another to overhear or record, without the consent of either a sender or receiver of the communication; (2) A person present during a conversation or discussion who intentionally and by means of an eavesdropping device overhears or records the conversation or discussion, or aids, authorizes, employs, procures, or permits another to overhear or record, without the consent of a party to the conversation or discussion; or (3) A member of a jury who intentionally records or listens to by means of an eavesdropping device the deliberations of the jury or aids, authorizes, employs, procures, or permits another to record or listen.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at sdlegislature.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Woods (South Dakota Supreme Court 1985, 361 N.W.2d 620)“…ent fails. We next address the State’s argument that SDCL 23A-35A-20(2) exempts one party consent recordings…”
- State v. Braddock (South Dakota Supreme Court 1990, 452 N.W.2d 785)“…nsent recordings without prior court authorization” because SDCL 23A-35A-20 exempts from criminal liability a perso…”
- Gantvoort v. Ranschau (South Dakota Supreme Court 2022, 2022 S.D. 22)“…ff when no noise was detected in the room. 3. SDCL 23A-35A-20(1)–(2), which criminalizes recordings m…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Dakota Security Camera Laws, South Dakota Medical Recording Laws, South Dakota Phone Call Recording Laws
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- SDCL 22-21-1 - Trespassing to eavesdrop, installation or use of unauthorized eavesdropping device(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-21-3 - Window peeking on private property of another(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-21-4 - Record, privacy, manipulated image violation(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 23A-35A-20 - Overhearing or recording communications by means of eavesdropping device as felony(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 23A-35A-1 - Definition of terms for interception of wire, electronic, or oral communications(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-6-1 - Felony classes and penalties(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-6-2 - Misdemeanor classes and penalties(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 22-19A-1 - Stalking as a misdemeanor(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 50-15 - Drones(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- South Dakota Title 22 Chapter 21 - Invasions of Privacy (2024)(law.justia.com)
- South Dakota Title 23A Chapter 35A - Interception of Wire, Electronic, or Oral Communications (2024)(law.justia.com)
- National Labor Relations Act(nlrb.gov).gov
- South Dakota Reporters Recording Guide(rcfp.org)
- SDCL 50-15-5 - Eavesdropping, violation of privacy by drone (misdemeanor)(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 50-15-6 - Trespassing, drone landing without consent (misdemeanor)(sdlegislature.gov).gov
- SDCL 50-15-3 - Unauthorized operation of drone over certain facilities, penalty, countermeasures permitted(sdlegislature.gov)
- SDCL 50-15-4 - Prohibited delivery of contraband or controlled substance by drone, felony(sdlegislature.gov)