EnglishEspañol
Recording LawsHawaii Laws flagHawaii Laws
Hawaii flag

Hawaii

Hawaii Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties

Independently fact-checkedEditor-reviewedLaw current as of November 1, 2026By Recording Law Editorial TeamReviewed November 2, 202615 min read

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Hawaii Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties

Hawaii follows a one-party consent rule under HRS 803-42, allowing participants to record phone calls and in-person conversations without notifying other parties. A separate statute, HRS 711-1111, makes it a misdemeanor to install or use a recording device in a private place without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there.

Hawaii permits audio recording of conversations under a one-party consent framework. Under HRS 803-42, you can legally record any phone call or in-person conversation as long as you are a party to the communication or have obtained consent from at least one participant. You do not need to inform the other parties that a recording is taking place.

However, Hawaii also has a separate privacy statute, HRS 711-1111, makes it a crime to install or use a recording device in a "private place" without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there. Hawaii courts have not decided whether that law reaches a participant who records a conversation on a phone or worn device, so where you record can matter.

This guide covers the specific statutes that govern audio recording in Hawaii, the private places exception, criminal and civil penalties for violations, how recordings are treated as evidence, and practical guidance for staying on the right side of the law.

The Core Statute: HRS 803-42

Hawaii's audio recording framework is built on HRS 803-42, which prohibits the intentional interception, use, or disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications. The statute makes it a criminal offense to intercept communications without authorization.

In Hawaii you may record a conversation you are part of without telling anyone, unless the purpose is criminal or tortious; inside someone else's private place, asking first is safer.
Being part of the conversation is enough under Hawaii's wiretap law unless your purpose is criminal or tortious, but ask before recording in someone else's home or private office.

The exception that lets ordinary private citizens record their own conversations is subsection (b)(3)(A). It is not unlawful for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a communication "when the person is a party to the communication or when one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to the interception," unless the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act. Subsection (b)(4) is the parallel rule for police and others acting under color of law.

This means that if you are a participant in a conversation, your own knowledge that you are recording satisfies the consent requirement. You do not need to announce the recording or obtain permission from anyone else.

Under Hawaii's one-party consent rule, your own awareness of the recording constitutes sufficient consent. This means:

  • You can record any phone call you are part of without telling the other person
  • You can record in-person conversations you participate in without announcing the recording
  • You can use a voice recorder, smartphone app, or any other device to capture conversations you are involved in
  • A third party can record a conversation if at least one participant has given prior consent

The law draws a clear line between recording your own conversations (legal) and secretly recording other people's private conversations that you are not part of (illegal interception).

Hawaii's statute does not require written or verbal consent from a specific party. The consent of one party to the communication is sufficient. When you record a conversation you are participating in, your own awareness of the recording constitutes consent. No additional notice, disclosure, or agreement from the other parties is necessary under the wiretapping statute. The Hawaii Supreme Court confirmed this one-party framework in State v. Okubo, 67 Haw. 197, 682 P.2d 79 (1984).

This is different from two-party consent states like California, Florida, and Pennsylvania, where every participant must agree before a recording can begin.

The Private Places Exception: HRS 711-1111

What Makes Hawaii Different

Hawaii has a separate privacy statute that can limit recording in some places. HRS 711-1111 addresses "violation of privacy in the second degree" and restricts recording devices in private places.

Under this statute, a person commits the offense of violation of privacy in the second degree if that person "installs or uses, or both, in any private place, without consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy therein, any means or device for observing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting sounds or events in that place." Recording someone undressed or in sexual activity is excluded from this offense because it is the separate Class C felony in HRS 711-1110.9.

What Qualifies as a "Private Place"

The statute defines a private place as "a place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from casual or hostile intrusion or surveillance." However, this does not include "a place to which the public or a substantial group thereof has access."

Examples of private places under Hawaii law include:

  • Private residences and homes
  • Hotel rooms and rental accommodations
  • Private offices with closed doors
  • Bathrooms and changing areas (a shared locker room may not qualify, because the definition excludes places a substantial group can access)
  • Medical examination rooms
  • Any enclosed area where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy

Examples of locations that are generally not private places:

  • Public streets, sidewalks, and parks
  • Public beaches
  • Open-plan offices and common work areas
  • Retail stores and restaurants
  • Government buildings open to the public
  • Public meeting rooms

Does the Private-Place Rule Reach a Participant?

HRS 711-1111 requires the consent of the people entitled to privacy in a private place before a recording device is installed or used there. It is a rule about surveillance devices, not a general all-party consent rule for conversations.

No Hawaii appellate court has decided whether a participant who simply records a conversation on a phone inside a private place violates it. In State v. Lee, 67 Haw. 307 (1984), the Hawaii Supreme Court held that an undercover officer who wore a recorder into a private office had not made a prohibited installation under the wiretap law as then written. Because the question is open, ask for consent before recording inside someone else's home, hotel room, or private office.

Penalties for Violating the Private Places Rule

Violation of privacy in the second degree under HRS 711-1111 is a misdemeanor. Under Hawaii's sentencing guidelines in HRS 706-663, a misdemeanor conviction can result in:

  • Up to 1 year in jail
  • Fines up to $2,000
  • Probation
  • A court order to destroy the recording

Types of Audio Recording Covered

Hawaii a clip-on lavalier microphone attached to a jacket lapel in tight close-up, shallow focus

In-Person Conversations

HRS 803-42 covers "oral communications," which are defined as any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that the communication is not subject to interception, under circumstances justifying that expectation. You can legally record face-to-face conversations in Hawaii when:

  • You are an active participant in the conversation
  • The conversation is one nobody could reasonably expect to be private, such as a public speech (a private conversation between other people, even in a public place, still needs a participant's consent)
  • At least one participant has consented to the recording

You cannot legally record in-person conversations when:

  • You are not a participant and no participant has consented
  • You install or use a device in someone else's private place without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there (courts have not decided whether this covers a participant recording on a phone)
  • You are recording with criminal or tortious intent

Telephone and VoIP Calls

The "wire communication" definition in HRS 803-41 covers telephone communications, which includes any aural transfer made through the use of facilities for the transmission of communications by wire, cable, or other similar connection. Under one-party consent, you can record:

  • Landline phone calls you participate in
  • Cell phone calls you are part of
  • VoIP calls through platforms like Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, and Skype
  • Video calls with audio components

The same one-party consent rule applies: as a participant in the call, your knowledge of the recording satisfies the consent requirement.

Electronic Communications

HRS 803-42 also covers electronic communications, defined as any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo-optical system. The interception of electronic communications without the consent of any party falls under the wiretapping statute.

Voicemail and Stored Communications

Accessing someone else's voicemail or stored audio messages without authorization may violate both state and federal law. The federal Stored Communications Act (18 U.S.C. 2701) prohibits unauthorized access to stored electronic communications and works alongside Hawaii's state provisions.

Criminal Penalties for Illegal Audio Recording

Hawaii treats illegal audio recording as a serious criminal matter. The penalties vary depending on which statute is violated.

Illegal Interception: Class C Felony (HRS 803-42)

Under HRS 803-42, the intentional interception, use, or disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications without authorization is a Class C felony. Under Hawaii's sentencing guidelines in HRS 706-660 and HRS 706-640:

  • Imprisonment for an indeterminate term of up to 5 years under HRS 706-660
  • Fines up to $10,000 under HRS 706-640
  • Probation may be imposed in lieu of imprisonment

Privacy Violation in Private Places: Misdemeanor (HRS 711-1111)

Installing or using a recording device in a private place without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there is a misdemeanor under HRS 711-1111:

  • Up to 1 year in jail
  • Fines up to $2,000
  • Court-ordered destruction of the recording

Privacy Violation in the First Degree: Class C Felony (HRS 711-1110.9)

If the recording involves intimate images or is made in certain aggravated circumstances, the charge can be elevated to violation of privacy in the first degree under HRS 711-1110.9, which is a Class C felony:

  • Up to 5 years in prison
  • Fines up to $10,000

Penalty Summary Table

OffenseStatuteClassificationMaximum Penalty
Illegal interception of communicationsHRS 803-42Class C FelonyUp to 5 years in prison, $10,000 fine
Installing or using a device in a private place without consentHRS 711-1111MisdemeanorUp to 1 year in jail, $2,000 fine
Intimate image recording violationsHRS 711-1110.9Class C FelonyUp to 5 years in prison, $10,000 fine

Civil Liability for Illegal Audio Recording

Hawaii a small audio recorder and over-ear headphones resting on a stack of legal documents

Statutory Civil Remedies: HRS 803-48

Beyond criminal prosecution, victims of illegal audio recording in Hawaii can pursue civil remedies under HRS 803-48. A person whose communication was illegally intercepted may recover:

  • The greater of (a) actual damages suffered as a result of the violation plus any profits the violator made from the illegal recording, or (b) statutory damages of the greater of $100 per day of violation or $10,000
  • Punitive damages, where appropriate
  • Equitable or declaratory relief as the court deems appropriate
  • Reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs

A good faith reliance on a court order is a complete defense to civil claims under this statute.

Additional Civil Claims

In addition to the statutory remedy, victims may also pursue:

  • Invasion of privacy tort claims under Hawaii common law
  • Intentional infliction of emotional distress where the recording caused severe emotional harm
  • Negligence claims in some circumstances

Audio Recordings as Evidence in Hawaii Courts

General Admissibility

Audio recordings made legally under Hawaii's one-party consent law are generally admissible as evidence in court proceedings. To admit a recording, the offering party must establish:

  • Authentication: Proof that the recording is genuine and has not been tampered with or altered
  • Relevance: The recording must relate to a matter at issue in the case
  • Identification of speakers: The voices on the recording must be identified, either by the recording party or through other testimony
  • Completeness: Courts may require that the full recording be made available

Under the Hawaii Rules of Evidence, Rule 901, authentication requires evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims it to be.

Illegally Obtained Recordings

Recordings obtained in violation of HRS 803-42 face significant admissibility challenges. An aggrieved person may move to suppress the contents of an intercepted communication, or evidence derived from it, on the grounds that it was unlawfully intercepted.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

  • Criminal cases: Illegally obtained recordings are typically inadmissible and may result in felony charges against the person who made the recording
  • Civil cases: Courts have more discretion, but illegally obtained evidence may still be excluded and could expose the recording party to civil liability under HRS 803-48

The Criminal or Tortious Purpose Exception

Hawaii two office chairs angled toward each other beside a window with a small voice recorder on the side table between them

How It Works

Hawaii's one-party consent exception includes an important limitation. The consent exception under HRS 803-42 does not apply if the communication is intercepted "for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of this State."

This means you cannot use one-party consent as a shield if your purpose in recording is to:

  • Commit blackmail or extortion
  • Harass or intimidate someone
  • Facilitate fraud or deception
  • Further any other criminal objective

Proving Tortious Purpose

Hawaii courts have not said who must prove a criminal or tortious purpose. Simply recording a conversation that captures unflattering information about someone does not constitute a tortious purpose. The intent behind the recording must be to further an independent criminal or tortious act.

Federal Law and Hawaii Audio Recording

The Federal Wiretap Act

The federal Wiretap Act (18 U.S.C. 2511) follows a one-party consent model that aligns with Hawaii's approach under HRS 803-42. Under federal law, recording a conversation is legal as long as at least one party consents. Since Hawaii's one-party consent standard matches the federal baseline, recordings that comply with HRS 803-42 are also legal under federal law.

The Stored Communications Act

The federal Stored Communications Act (18 U.S.C. 2701) prohibits unauthorized access to stored electronic communications. This statute applies when someone accesses another person's voicemail, saved audio files, or cloud-stored recordings without permission.

When Federal and State Law Interact

Federal wiretap law sets a floor for privacy protections. States can impose stricter requirements but cannot allow less protection than the federal standard. Hawaii's private-place law, HRS 711-1111, is an example of a state adding protections that federal wiretap law does not have.

Recording Across State Lines

Interstate Call Recording

Hawaii's geographic isolation as an island state means most interstate calls involve significant distance. When you are in Hawaii and calling someone in another state, you need to consider both Hawaii law and the law of the other state.

Courts decide case by case which state's law governs a call between states, and they do not all reach the same answer. Thirteen states require every party's consent for at least some recordings (see two-party consent states):

  • California
  • Connecticut (phone calls)
  • Delaware (conflicting statutes)
  • Florida
  • Illinois
  • Maryland
  • Massachusetts
  • Montana
  • Nevada (phone calls)
  • New Hampshire
  • Oregon (in-person conversations)
  • Pennsylvania
  • Washington

Best Practices for Interstate Recording

When recording calls with people in other states from Hawaii:

  • Determine where the other party is located before recording
  • If the other party is in a two-party consent state, inform them that the call is being recorded
  • Get explicit verbal consent at the start of the call when in doubt
  • Document the consent on the recording itself

AI Recording and Transcription Tools

Because Hawaii follows one-party consent under HRS 803-42, you can use AI-powered recording and transcription tools to capture conversations you participate in. This includes:

  • AI meeting assistants that join video calls
  • Smartphone apps that record and transcribe calls
  • Wearable AI voice recorders like Plaud
  • Built-in transcription features in Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Google Meet

Wearable Recording Devices

Hawaii's one-party consent law permits the use of wearable recording devices like AI voice recorders and smart glasses to capture audio in most settings. HRS 711-1111 may still matter in someone else's private space. Hawaii courts have not decided whether wearing a recorder into a private place violates it (in State v. Lee (1984), an officer's body-worn recorder was not a prohibited installation under the wiretap law as then written), so ask for consent before recording in another person's home or private office.

Practical Considerations

  • Data security matters. AI services may store recordings on third-party servers. Understand where your audio data goes and who has access.
  • Review transcripts for accuracy. AI transcription is not perfect. Errors in automated transcripts could be problematic if used as evidence.
  • Ask first in private places. Wearable technology does not override HRS 711-1111, and whether that law reaches a participant's own recording is unsettled.

Can I Record a Conversation With My Lawyer?

Yes. As a participant in the conversation, you can record discussions with your attorney under one-party consent. The attorney-client privilege protects the contents of the conversation regardless of whether it is recorded. However, your lawyer may object on ethical grounds.

Can I Record Customer Service Calls?

Yes. When you call a business and they play a message stating "this call may be recorded," that is the business exercising its one-party consent right. You have the same right as the other party on the call. You can record any customer service call you participate in.

Can I Record a Conversation at a Restaurant or Beach?

Public spaces like restaurants and beaches are generally not "private places" under HRS 711-1111. Recording your own conversations in these settings is legal under one-party consent. Hawaii's famous beaches, parks, and outdoor spaces are public areas where privacy expectations are limited.

Can I Record My Ex-Spouse or Co-Parent?

Yes, during conversations you are part of. This is common in custody disputes. However, do not record your children's private conversations without being present, and do not use children to secretly record the other parent.

Federal Deepfake Developments

Hawaii's election deepfake law, Act 191 SLH 2024, was permanently enjoined as facially unconstitutional in Babylon Bee LLC v. Lopez, No. 1:25-cv-00234 (D. Haw. Jan. 30, 2026) (Park, J.). The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act (2025) has required covered platforms since May 19, 2026 to honor 48-hour takedown requests for non-consensual intimate images, including AI-generated deepfakes. These developments do not change Hawaii's core one-party consent rules for audio recording but are relevant context for how recorded content may be lawfully shared or distributed.

More Hawaii Recording Laws

Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism and Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant Recording | Dashcam Laws | School Recording | Medical Recording

Back to Hawaii Recording Laws

More Hawaii Recording Topics

More Hawaii Laws

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it legal to audio record a conversation in Hawaii without telling the other person?

Yes. Hawaii is a one-party consent state under HRS 803-42. As a participant in the conversation, your own knowledge of the recording satisfies the consent requirement. You do not need to inform or get permission from the other person. If you are inside someone else's home, hotel room, or other private place, a separate law, HRS 711-1111, bars installing or using a recording device there without the consent of the people entitled to privacy, and courts have not settled whether it covers a participant recording on a phone, so ask first.

What is the private places exception in Hawaii recording law?

HRS 711-1111 makes it a misdemeanor to install or use a recording device in a private place without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there. A private place is a location where someone may reasonably expect to be safe from casual or hostile intrusion or surveillance. This includes private homes, hotel rooms, and closed offices. Public spaces and areas accessible to a substantial group of the public are not considered private places. Hawaii courts have not decided whether the law covers a participant recording a conversation on a phone.

What are the penalties for illegally recording audio in Hawaii?

Illegal interception under HRS 803-42 is a Class C felony carrying up to 5 years in prison and fines up to $10,000. Installing or using a recording device in a private place without consent under HRS 711-1111 is a misdemeanor with up to 1 year in jail and fines up to $2,000. A person whose conversation or call was illegally intercepted can also sue under HRS 803-48 for statutory damages of at least $10,000.

Can I use an AI voice recorder in Hawaii?

Yes, in most settings. Hawaii one-party consent law permits the use of AI voice recorders and wearable recording devices to capture conversations you participate in. In someone else's private home or closed office, ask for consent first: HRS 711-1111 bars using a recording device in a private place without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there, and courts have not settled whether it covers a participant's own recorder.

Can an illegally recorded conversation be used as evidence in Hawaii?

Generally, no. An aggrieved person can move to suppress the contents of an unlawfully intercepted communication, or evidence derived from it. Illegally obtained recordings face significant admissibility challenges in both criminal and civil proceedings.

Updates

Clarified that the HRS 803-48 civil remedy covers intercepted calls and conversations, added its punitive-damages element, removed a defense the statute does not contain, and cited HRS 803-41 for the definitions.

We corrected this page to describe Hawaii as a one-party consent state, explained that it is unsettled whether the private-place law (HRS 711-1111) reaches a participant recording on a phone or wearable, completed the list of all-party consent states and how courts handle interstate calls, fixed the statutory subsection and quotations, and clarified the TAKE IT DOWN Act dates. Removed a statement that face-to-face conversations may be recorded whenever they happen in a public or semi-public setting (Hawaii's wiretap law turns on being a party, having a party's consent, or no reasonable expectation of privacy), and clarified that HRS 803-48 civil damages are for people whose communications were intercepted.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes

Fixed five sourcing errors: removed a fabricated HRS 803-47 suppression-motion cite (803-47 is actually the annual wiretap-reporting statute); swapped the (b)(3)/(b)(4) subsections, which had the private-citizen and law-enforcement exceptions backwards; corrected HRS 803-48 civil damages from cumulative to the statute's actual 'greater of' alternative structure; and re-attributed the $10,000 fine to HRS 706-640 (706-660 sets only the prison term).

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Governing law re-checked for recent changes

Reviewed and approved by an editor

Sources and References

  1. Hawaii Revised Statutes 803-42 - Interception of Wire, Oral, or Electronic Communications(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
  2. Hawaii Revised Statutes 803-48 - Recovery of Civil Damages Authorized(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
  3. Hawaii Revised Statutes 711-1111 - Violation of Privacy in the Second Degree(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
  4. Hawaii Revised Statutes 711-1110.9 - Violation of Privacy in the First Degree(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
  5. Hawaii Revised Statutes 706-660 - Sentence of Imprisonment for Class B and C Felonies(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
  6. Hawaii Rules of Evidence Rule 901 - Authentication(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
  7. 18 U.S.C. 2511 - Federal Wiretap Act(law.cornell.edu)
  8. 18 U.S.C. 2701 - Federal Stored Communications Act(law.cornell.edu)
  9. Hawaii Revised Statutes 706-640 - Fines for Class C Felonies(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
Share: