The popularity of drones has risen significantly in recent years due to the sophistication of hardware, software, and cameras. There utility applies both recreationally and professionally in a vast array of business applications. They are common with surveyors, real estate agents, emergency rescue, and other professions. It is a common misunderstanding that you may have to fly over a person’s property line to violate an ordinance, regulation, or statute. That is not the case in Tennessee as I learned with a recent case I took on in criminal court. The vertical height and angle of view while over your property is sufficient to capture another property.
Ordinarily in my criminal law blog posts I post a certain specific statute that applies to that criminal charge. However, with Tennessee’s drone law, you must review several statutes that all apply collectively as set out in TCA 39-13-901 through 907. The primary thrust of the statute applies to “surveillance” and “capture of images.”
The first section of the statute TCA 39-13-902 prescribes an exhaustive list of exceptions to the statute wherein no violation occurs. These include but are not limited to academic research, military use, law enforcement, emergency rescue, mapping property, surveying, utilities, real estate agent marketing, and fire suppression. It is necessary to read the enumerated exceptions as it is lengthy.
TCA 39-13-903 is the main section under the title statute that applies and prescribes what constitutes a violation. The first is a person that flies a drone “capturing images” over a person’s private real property with “the intent to conduct surveillance” and the person or property is in the image, then its a class c misdemeanor violation. The second violation set out is without the venue owner or operator’s consent, a drone operator uses an unmanned aircraft to intentionally capture an image of an individual or event at, or drop any item or substance into, an open-air event venue wherein more than one hundred (100) individuals are gathered for a ticketed event. The third primary violation is if drone operator knowingly uses an unmanned aircraft within or over a designated fireworks discharge site, fireworks display site, or fireworks fallout area during an event as defined in § 68-104-202, without the consent of the owner or operator of the event. The fourth possible violation is flying over a correctional facility. A violation can become a E felony if Without the business operator’s written consent, if drone operator knowingly uses an unmanned aircraft within two hundred fifty feet (250′) of the perimeter of any critical infrastructure facility for the purpose of conducting surveillance of, gathering evidence or collecting information about, or photographically or electronically recording, critical infrastructure data.
There are two statutory defense as set out that a person charged can plead.
- It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the person destroyed the image:
- As soon as the person had knowledge that the image was captured in violation of this section; and
- Without disclosing, displaying, or distributing the image to a third party.
An image captured by an unmanned aircraft that was incidental to the lawful capturing of an image:
- May not be used as evidence in any criminal or juvenile proceeding, civil action, or administrative proceeding;
- Is not subject to disclosure, inspection, or copying under title 10, chapter 7; and
- Is not subject to discovery, subpoena, or other means of legal compulsion for its release.
About Roland
