Utah
Utah Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules
Utah is a one-party consent state under Utah Code Ann. 77-23a-4. If you are a party to a conversation, you may record it without notifying anyone else. Recording without that consent is a third-degree felony carrying up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine, plus civil liability with a $10,000 statutory floor.
Utah recording law at a glance
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Consent rule | One-party (you may record conversations you participate in) |
| Main statute | Utah Code Ann. 77-23a-4 (Utah Interception of Communications Act) |
| When recording is illegal | Recording a wire, oral, or electronic communication without being a party and without any party's consent, or recording for a criminal or tortious purpose |
| Criminal penalty | Third-degree felony: up to 5 years prison; up to $5,000 fine |
| Civil penalty | Greater of actual damages + profits, $100/day, or $10,000; plus punitive damages and attorney fees |
| Hidden cameras | Lawful on your own property in areas with no privacy expectation; 76-12-307 bars secret recording where the subject has a reasonable expectation of privacy |
| Recording police | First Amendment right clearly established as of May 26, 2019 (Irizarry v. Yehia, 10th Cir. 2022) |
See the in-depth guides below for specific situations.
Recording in-person conversations in Utah
Utah Code Ann. 77-23a-4 covers wire, electronic, and oral communications. The "oral communication" definition under 77-23a-3 requires that the speaker have a reasonable expectation the conversation is private. That means public statements made in a park, lobby, sidewalk, or open meeting generally fall outside the statute and can be recorded without consent.
When a conversation takes place in a private setting, you may record it as long as you are a participant. The one-party rule does not allow you to plant a recording device and leave the room: you must be present in the conversation at the time of recording. A device-only third-party interception is the core violation pattern under 77-23a-4.
The criminal or tortious purpose qualifier is the structural gatekeeper. A recording that is otherwise lawful loses its safe harbor if it is made to facilitate blackmail, extortion, fraud, defamation, or another crime or tort. This mirrors the federal ECPA qualifier at 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d).
Recording phone calls in Utah
The one-party consent rule applies equally to landlines, cellular, cordless, and VoIP calls (Zoom, Teams, Google Meet). You do not need to tell the other party the call is being recorded, and there is no statutory beep-tone requirement: the FCC removed 47 C.F.R. 64.501 effective November 20, 2017.
Interstate calls require extra attention. Federal ECPA is a one-party floor; it does not preempt stricter state law. For calls touching California (Cal. Penal Code 632), Washington (RCW 9.73.030), or Nevada phone lines (NRS 200.620 per Lane v. Allstate), the conservative posture is to treat the call as all-party and notify before recording. Utah-Arizona calls are fine under one-party (A.R.S. 13-3005).
For more detail on call recording, including business use cases and multistate scenarios, see the Utah Phone Call Recording Laws sub-page.
Hidden cameras, doorbells, and nanny cams
Title 77 Chapter 23a governs audio interception; pure video recording is addressed separately. Utah Code Ann. 76-12-307 (eff. May 7, 2025) criminalizes intentionally using any technology to secretly record a person where that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, and private bedrooms are always protected.
A Ring doorbell or exterior security camera capturing street-side audio generally does not trigger 77-23a-4, because people on a public sidewalk lack a privacy expectation. A camera positioned to capture audio inside a foyer or living room where guests have a privacy expectation can create interception exposure unless a household participant has consented.
A nanny cam in a child's room or a home workspace satisfies 77-23a-4 when a parent or employer is treated as a consenting participant. Best practice is a written disclosure to caregivers and signage at entry points. Audio recording in a workplace where the employer is not a party to the conversation remains an interception even where video is permitted, because the employer is not a "party" under 77-23a-4.
The penalty under 76-12-307 for recording an adult without consent is a Class A misdemeanor (up to 364 days jail, up to $2,500 fine). Recording a child under 14 is a third-degree felony. Distribution of recordings obtained by voyeurism (76-12-308) is a third-degree felony for adults and a second-degree felony (1 to 15 years) for children under 14.
See Utah Security Camera Laws and Utah Voyeurism Laws for full treatment.
Penalties for illegal recording in Utah
The presumptive criminal penalty under 77-23a-4 is a third-degree felony for any unlawful interception and for knowing use or disclosure of an unlawfully intercepted communication (subsections (1)(b)(iii)-(iv)). The penalty structure under 76-3-203(3) and 76-3-301:
| Conduct | Class | Max Prison | Max Fine |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful interception (presumptive) | Third-degree felony | 5 years | $5,000 |
| Use or disclosure of unlawfully intercepted communication | Third-degree felony | 5 years | $5,000 |
| First-offense radio carve-out: cellular/paging (unscrambled) | Class B misdemeanor | 6 months | $1,000 |
| First-offense radio carve-out: other unscrambled radio types | Class A misdemeanor | 364 days | $2,500 |
The radio carve-out under 77-23a-4(10)(b) requires all four conditions: first offense, no prior conviction under Chapter 23a; not for a tortious or illegal purpose; not for commercial advantage or private financial gain; and the communication must be an unscrambled radio transmission. Encrypted cell calls, standard phone lines, and in-person conversations fall outside the carve-out. Its practical reach is narrow: hobbyist scanner interception of unencrypted emergency channels, accidental baby-monitor capture, CB radio public-band transmissions.
For civil liability, Utah Code Ann. 77-23a-11 entitles a plaintiff to the greater of: (1) actual damages plus the violator's profits, (2) $100 per day of violation, or (3) $10,000 - whichever is largest. On top of the floor, the plaintiff may also recover punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, reasonably incurred litigation costs, and preliminary or declaratory relief. The two-year limitations period is a discovery rule: the clock starts when the claimant first had a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation. Civil recovery does not require a criminal conviction.
Recording the police in Utah
Utah sits in the Tenth Circuit. The controlling framework is a two-step progression anchored by two cases.
Frasier v. Evans, 992 F.3d 1003 (10th Cir. 2021) held that any First Amendment right to record police was not "clearly established" in the Tenth Circuit as of August 2014, when the underlying Denver incident occurred. All defendant officers received qualified immunity. This case controls for incidents predating May 26, 2019.
Irizarry v. Yehia, 38 F.4th 1282 (10th Cir. 2022) reversed a qualified immunity grant and recognized the clearly established First Amendment right to film police performing public duties. The underlying incident was May 26, 2019, in Lakewood, Colorado: Officer Yehia obstructed a YouTube journalist filming a DUI traffic stop, then shone a flashlight into his camera. The Tenth Circuit joined six other circuits in recognizing the right. This case controls for incidents on or after May 26, 2019.
Practical guidance for Utah: you may film officers at traffic stops, arrests, protests, and other public encounters. Do not physically interfere with the work, comply with lawful distance orders, and do not trespass to improve your angle. An officer cannot lawfully seize your phone or demand deletion of footage solely because you were filming. Utah has no standalone statutory right-to-record-police comparable to Colorado's C.R.S. 16-3-311; enforcement runs through 42 U.S.C. 1983 with attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. 1988.
See Utah Laws on Recording Police for the full treatment.
Special topics in Utah
Two Utah statutes share the word "recording" - they are unrelated
Utah Code Ann. Title 13 Chapter 10 is the Unauthorized Recording Practices Act. It governs bootleg recordings of live performances and unauthorized commercial sound recordings - a copyright-adjacent piracy statute. The consent and wiretap rules live in Title 77 Chapter 23a (the Utah Interception of Communications Act). They share the word "recording" and surface together in searches but address completely different conduct.
Body-worn cameras: Title 77 Chapter 7a
Utah's body-worn camera framework is in Title 77 Chapter 7a. Section 77-7a-104 (last amended May 7, 2025) requires officers to activate the camera before any law enforcement encounter or as soon as reasonably possible. The Utah-specific structural feature is 77-7a-104(11): a violation of the activation rules may not serve as the sole basis to dismiss a criminal case or charge. Defense counsel can still use non-activation as one factor in a broader suppression or credibility challenge, but not as a standalone dismissal ground.
NCII: authentic images (76-5b-203) and deepfakes (76-5b-205)
Utah Code Ann. 76-5b-203 criminalizes non-consensual distribution of authentic intimate images (Class A misdemeanor first offense; third-degree felony on recidivism). Utah Code Ann. 76-5b-205 is the separate hook for counterfeit intimate images - the definition expressly covers AI-generated, digitally altered, edited, or manipulated visual depictions of an identifiable person. Charging the wrong section in a deepfake case (203 instead of 205) is a material element mismatch. The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act (Pub. L. 119-12, signed May 19, 2025) adds a parallel federal criminal prohibition and a 48-hour platform notice-and-takedown obligation effective May 19, 2026.
AI synthetic media and the Utah AI Policy Act
Utah Code Ann. 20A-11-1104 (SB 131 (2024)) requires audible or on-screen AI-content disclosures in political and election communications, with a $1,000 civil penalty per violation. The Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act (SB 149 (2024), codified Title 13 Chapter 72a) brought generative AI within Utah consumer protection law and requires licensed professionals to disclose AI use in consumer-facing interactions. HB 452 and SB 332 (both eff. May 7, 2025) extended the Act's sunset to July 1, 2027 and refined disclosure requirements. For recording-law purposes, the Act is most relevant when downstream AI processing (transcription, voice cloning, biometric extraction) is applied to a recorded file.
Workplace recording and the NLRB framework
Utah's one-party consent rule governs the criminal and civil interception layer for workplace recordings. The federal NLRB layer applies to employer no-recording policies. Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (Aug. 2, 2023) requires employers to show a no-recording rule advances a legitimate, substantial business interest that cannot be served by a narrower rule. NLRB GC 25-05 (Feb. 14, 2025) rescinded certain prior General Counsel memoranda but did not overrule Stericycle. NLRB GC 25-07 (June 25, 2025) is narrow: surreptitious recording of collective-bargaining sessions is a per se good-faith violation; it does not change the general workplace recording framework.
Federal overlay: ECPA, FCC, and HIPAA
The federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act at 18 U.S.C. 2510-2522 is a one-party consent floor that mirrors 77-23a-4. Utah plaintiffs routinely plead both. FCC Declaratory Ruling 24-17 (Feb. 2024) classifies AI-generated voices in robocalls as "artificial or prerecorded voice" under the TCPA, with $500 per violation. The FCC One-to-One Consent rule (FCC 24-24) was vacated by the Eleventh Circuit in Insurance Marketing Coalition Ltd. v. FCC, 127 F.4th 303 (11th Cir. 2025); pre-existing TCPA prior-express-written-consent rules still apply. HIPAA does not block a patient from recording their own medical visit, but a Utah covered entity recording a patient typically needs HIPAA authorization.
Recent legal developments
- HB 21 (2025, eff. May 7, 2025): Criminal Code Recodification renumbered voyeurism from 76-9-702.7 to 76-12-307, viewing-only to 76-12-306, and distribution to 76-12-308. Substantive elements and penalty classifications unchanged. 77-23a-4 untouched.
- HB 452 and SB 332 (2025, eff. May 7, 2025): Refined the Utah AI Policy Act; extended sunset to July 1, 2027; adjusted disclosure requirements for regulated professions.
- 77-7a-104 amended (eff. May 7, 2025): Body-worn camera activation rules updated; 77-7a-104(11) no-sole-basis-for-dismissal clause preserved.
- TAKE IT DOWN Act (Pub. L. 119-12, signed May 19, 2025): Federal criminal prohibition on NCII (authentic and deepfake); platforms must implement 48-hour takedown procedure by May 19, 2026.
- SB 131 and SB 149 (2024, eff. May 1, 2024): Created election synthetic-media disclosure at 20A-11-1104 and the Utah AI Policy Act at Title 13 Chapter 72a.
- FCC 24-24 vacated (Jan. 24, 2025, mandate Apr. 30, 2025): Eleventh Circuit set aside the One-to-One Consent rule nationally; pre-existing TCPA consent rules remain.
Utah recording laws in depth
By type of recording
- Utah Audio Recording Laws
- Utah Phone Call Recording Laws
- Utah Video Recording Laws
- Utah Voyeurism Laws
- Utah Dashcam Laws
By place or relationship
- Utah Laws on Recording Police
- Utah Laws on Recording in Public
- Utah Workplace Recording Laws
- Utah Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws
- Utah Medical Recording Laws
- Utah School Recording Laws
- Utah Security Camera Laws
More Utah laws
- Utah AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Utah At-Will Employment Laws
- Utah Data Privacy Laws
- Utah Divorce Laws
- Utah Landlord-Tenant Laws
This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Recording laws change and apply differently to each situation. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed Utah attorney.
More Utah Laws
- Utah AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Utah Alimony Laws
- Utah At-Will Employment Laws
- Utah Car Accident Laws
- Utah Car Seat Laws
- Utah Child Custody Laws
- Utah Child Support Laws
- Utah Common Law Marriage Laws
- Utah Data Privacy Laws
- Utah Deepfake Laws
- Utah Divorce Laws
- Utah Dog Bite Laws
- Utah Emancipation Laws
- Utah Expungement Laws
- Utah Hit and Run Laws
- Utah Landlord-Tenant Laws
Sources and References
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- le.utah.gov.gov
- ca10.uscourts.gov.gov
- ca10.uscourts.gov.gov
- uscode.house.gov.gov
- uscode.house.gov.gov
- justice.gov.gov
- docs.fcc.gov.gov
- media.ca11.uscourts.gov.gov
- federalregister.gov.gov
- congress.gov.gov
- nlrb.gov.gov
- nlrb.gov.gov
- nlrb.gov.gov
- ftc.gov.gov
- ecfr.gov.gov
- utcourts.gov.gov