May 11, 2026·5:22-CR-00325-R-1·Panel Decision·By Aisha Johnson
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied a petition for rehearing en banc in a Fourth Amendment case involving warrantless observation through a motel window. A dissent argued that the majority eroded privacy protections by relying on a plain view doctrine that ignored the reasonable expectation of privacy behind closed curtains.
The case originated from a criminal proceeding in the Western District of Oklahoma. The defendant, Cameron Watkins, challenged the admissibility of evidence obtained when a law enforcement officer observed the interior of a motel room through a window.
The court’s reasoning
The court issued a per curiam order denying the petition for panel rehearing by a majority vote. The court also denied the petition for rehearing en banc after a poll of all non-recused active judges failed to carry the vote. In a separate concurrence, Judge Hartz noted that a review of state statutes regarding peeping toms suggests that the majority of such laws would not apply to law enforcement officers due to requirements for trespass, lewd intent, or specific exceptions for police activities.
The dissent
This court has missed its opportunity to correct a significant and unwarranted erosion of Fourth Amendment protections.
Moritz
What it means going forward
The denial of rehearing en banc leaves the panel’s original decision in place, maintaining the legal standard that allowed the observation in this specific context without further review by the full court.
