Utah
Utah Voyeurism Laws
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. · 9 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Under Utah Code Ann. 76-12-307, secretly recording a person, without their knowledge or consent, to view a part of their body they reasonably expect to keep private, in circumstances where they expect privacy, is a Class A misdemeanor, escalating to a third degree felony under aggravating circumstances such as a victim under 14. Distributing those images is a third degree felony under 76-12-308. Utah's voyeurism statutes cover any technology capable of capturing images without the subject's knowledge or consent.
Utah criminalizes voyeurism and hidden camera offenses under Utah Code Ann. 76-12-307, Recorded or Photographed Voyeurism. This section replaced the former 76-9-702.7 when Utah's 2025 criminal code recodification took effect, splitting that statute's substance into 76-12-306 (viewing), 76-12-307 (recording), and 76-12-308 (distribution). It prohibits using technology to secretly record someone, for the purpose of viewing a part of their body they reasonably expect to keep private, in circumstances where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
This guide covers what conduct is prohibited, the criminal penalties for voyeurism at different severity levels, how these laws interact with Utah's wiretapping statute, and the remedies available to victims.
Utah's Voyeurism Statute (76-12-307)
What the Law Prohibits
A person is guilty of voyeurism who intentionally uses any type of technology to secretly or surreptitiously record, by video, photograph, or other means, an individual:
- For the purpose of viewing any portion of the individual's body regarding which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, whether or not covered with clothing
- Without the knowledge or consent of the individual
- Under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy
This statute applies broadly. It covers traditional hidden cameras, smartphone recordings, spy cameras, drone cameras, and any other technology capable of capturing images.
Elements Prosecutors Must Prove
- The defendant intentionally used technology to record
- The recording was secret or surreptitious
- The purpose was to view a body area where privacy is expected
- The victim did not know about or consent to the recording
- The circumstances created a reasonable expectation of privacy
Criminal Penalties
| Offense | Classification | Maximum Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Voyeuristic recording | Class A Misdemeanor | 364 days jail, $2,500 fine |
| Voyeuristic recording, aggravated (victim under 14, wrong-sex privacy space, or combined with certain trespass/lewdness/loitering offenses) | Third Degree Felony | 5 years prison, $5,000 fine |
| Viewing without recording (reasonable expectation of privacy) | Class B Misdemeanor | 6 months jail |
| Viewing without recording, aggravated (same circumstances as above) | Class A Misdemeanor | 364 days jail, $2,500 fine |
| Distribution of voyeuristic images | Third Degree Felony | 5 years prison, $5,000 fine |
| Distribution involving child under 14 | Second Degree Felony | 1-15 years prison, $10,000 fine |
The escalating penalties reflect the severity of the offense. Simple viewing carries the lightest punishment, while distribution involving minors carries the most severe.
Hidden Cameras in Private Places
Where Voyeurism Protections Apply
Places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in Utah include:
- Bathrooms, restrooms, and shower facilities
- Locker rooms and changing areas
- Bedrooms and hotel rooms
- Medical examination rooms
- Dressing rooms in retail stores
- Private offices with closed doors
- Any enclosed area where a person reasonably believes they are unobserved
Utah's voyeurism statutes expressly provide that a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public restroom (Utah Code 76-12-306(4) and 76-12-307(4)).
Workplace Hidden Cameras
Employers who install cameras in a private place, such as a bathroom or locker room, without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there commit unlawful privacy violation under Utah Code 76-12-302, a class B misdemeanor. If the camera is used to secretly record employees' bodies, recorded-voyeurism charges under 76-12-307 can follow. Cameras in common work areas are generally permissible.
Residential Hidden Cameras
Installing a hidden camera or recording device in a private place in someone else's home without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there is unlawful privacy violation under Utah Code 76-12-302, and the person recorded can sue for an injunction and damages. This applies to:
- Landlords placing cameras in tenant-occupied units
- Partners or roommates placing cameras in private areas without consent
- Domestic workers monitored in private spaces
- Any person who installs a camera in another's living space
Nonconsensual Intimate Images
Utah separately addresses the distribution of intimate images without consent. Under Utah Code 76-5b-203, knowingly sharing an intimate image of an adult without consent, when you know or should know it would cause a reasonable person emotional distress and it does, is a class A misdemeanor, and a third degree felony on a second conviction.
Utah Code 76-5b-205 separately makes it a crime to share a fake or AI-generated intimate image of an identifiable person without consent. It is a class A misdemeanor, and a third degree felony when an adult shares one depicting a child.
Interaction With Federal Law
Utah's voyeurism laws operate alongside federal protections:
- The Video Voyeurism Prevention Act of 2004 (18 U.S.C. 1801) applies only within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, such as certain federal enclaves, not on all federal property
- Federal wiretap law (18 U.S.C. 2511) applies to audio captured by hidden cameras
- FERPA limits how a school shares recordings it keeps that are directly related to a student
Reporting Voyeurism in Utah
- Contact local law enforcement immediately
- Do not disturb hidden camera devices found
- Document the date, time, location, and details
- Preserve any evidence
- Consult an attorney about civil remedies, including the statutory claims under Utah Code 76-12-302 and 78B-6-2702 and invasion of privacy claims
More Utah Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording
Back to Utah Recording Laws- US Recording Laws
More Utah Recording Topics
More Utah Laws
- Utah AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Utah Dashcam Laws
- Utah Data Privacy Laws
- Utah Deepfake Laws
- Utah Employee Monitoring Laws
- Utah GPS Tracking Laws
- Utah Police Bodycam Laws
- Utah Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is voyeurism a felony in Utah?
Voyeuristic recording is generally a Class A misdemeanor, but it escalates to a third degree felony under 76-12-307(3)(b) if the victim is under 14, the recording occurs in a sex-designated privacy space not designed for the actor's sex, or it is combined with certain trespass, lewdness, or loitering offenses. Distributing voyeuristic images is a third degree felony (up to 5 years in prison), and distribution involving a child under 14 is a second degree felony (up to 15 years).
Are hidden cameras illegal in Utah?
Installing a hidden camera in a private place, such as a bathroom, someone else's bedroom, or a locker room, without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there is a crime under Utah Code 76-12-302. In public areas or your own common spaces, hidden cameras are not specifically prohibited.
What should I do if I find a hidden camera in Utah?
Contact local law enforcement immediately. Do not disturb the device. Document the date, time, and location. Consult an attorney about civil remedies, including statutory claims under Utah Code 76-12-302 and 78B-6-2702 as well as invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims.
Does Utah have a revenge porn law?
Yes. Under Utah Code 76-5b-203, knowingly sharing an intimate image of an adult without consent, when you know or should know it would cause emotional distress and it does, is a class A misdemeanor, and a third degree felony on a second conviction. Distributing images obtained through voyeurism is a third degree felony under 76-12-308, and 76-5b-205 covers fake or AI-generated intimate images.
Can my landlord install hidden cameras in my apartment in Utah?
No. A tenant-occupied rental unit is a private place. A landlord who installs hidden cameras inside your apartment without consent commits unlawful privacy violation under Utah Code 76-12-302, and can also face recorded-voyeurism charges under 76-12-307 if the camera records your body, and wiretapping charges if it captures your private conversations.
Updates
Restated the viewing offense under Utah Code 76-12-306 using its reasonable-expectation-of-privacy element, and removed an absolute statement about workplace cameras that the statute does not support.
We named Utah Code 76-12-302 as the law against installing hidden cameras in private places, restored the body-viewing purpose element of recorded voyeurism, replaced the common-law remedies claim with the statutory civil actions (76-12-302 and the 2026 intimate-image law, 78B-6-2702), corrected the intimate-image crime's mental state and added AI-generated images (76-5b-205), narrowed the federal video voyeurism law to federal enclaves, and updated the description to the current 76-12 sections.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Added the felony-level aggravation Utah's voyeurism-recording law carries for a child victim or certain other circumstances (previously described as a flat misdemeanor in the table, key takeaways, lede, and FAQ), added the corresponding misdemeanor-level aggravation for viewing-only offenses, corrected the base recording offense's jail term from 1 year to the legally accurate 364 days, and removed a dead, unreferenced citation.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the citation for Utah's voyeurism offenses: the 2025 recodification (Chapter 173, effective 5/7/2025) repealed 76-9-702.7 and split it into three new sections -- 76-12-306 (viewing without recording), 76-12-307 (recorded or photographed voyeurism, which this page's recording-focused content actually describes), and 76-12-308 (distribution) -- rather than simply renumbering one section. Updated in-body citations and the Sources entry accordingly; the penalty tiers described (Class A misdemeanor recording / Class B misdemeanor viewing / third degree felony distribution / second degree felony distribution of a child's image) were verified unchanged against the official recodified text.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Replaced generic NCII paragraph with precise 76-5b-203 (authentic) vs 76-5b-205 (counterfeit/deepfake/synthetic) distinction. Added TAKE IT DOWN Act federal overlay (Pub. L. 119-12, signed May 19 2025, platform compliance May 19 2026). Replaced erroneous 76-9-702.5 SourcesList entry with 76-5b-203 and 76-5b-205 canonical le.utah.gov entries.
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.
Utah Code, Title 76: Criminal Offenses
§ 76-12-307Recorded or photographed voyeurism.In forcecited in 14 of our articles
(1) (a) As used in this section, "sex-designated privacy space" means the same as that term is defined in Section 76-12-309. (b) Terms defined in Sections 76-1-101.5, 76-12-101, and 76-12-301 apply to this section. (2) An actor commits recorded or photographed voyeurism if the actor intentionally uses any type of technology to secretly or surreptitiously record, by video, photograph, or other means, an individual: (a) for the purpose of viewing any portion of the individual's body regarding which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, whether or not that portion of the body is covered with clothing; (b) without the knowledge or consent of the individual; and (c) under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy. (3) (a) Except as provided in Subsection(3)(b), a violation of Subsection (2) is a class A misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Also relied on in: Utah Smart Glasses Recording Laws (2026), Utah Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Utah Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws
§ 76-12-306Voyeurism.In forcecited in 4 of our articles
(1) (a) As used in this section, "sex-designated privacy space" means the same as that term is defined in Section 76-12-309. (b) Terms defined in Sections 76-1-101.5, 76-12-101, and 76-12-301 apply to this section. (2) An actor commits voyeurism if: (a) the actor views, or attempts to view, an individual, with or without the use of an instrumentality: (i) with the intent of viewing any portion of the individual's body regarding which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, whether or not that portion of the body is covered with clothing; (ii) without the knowledge or consent of the individual; and (iii) under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy; and (b) the actor's conduct described in Subsection (2)(a) does not amount to a violation of Section 76-12-307, Recorded or photographed voyeurism. (3) (a) Except as provided in Subsection (3)(b), a violation of Subsection (2) is a class B misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. Watkins (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2026)“…Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 42.01;2 Utah Code Ann. § 76-12-302;3 Utah Code Ann. § 76-12-306;2 Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 2605;3 Va.…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Utah Employee Monitoring Laws: Workplace Surveillance and Social Media (2026), Utah Ring Doorbell Laws: What You Need to Know in 2026, Utah Surveillance Camera Laws: Video and Audio (2027)
§ 76-12-308Distribution of images obtained through voyeurism.In forcecited in 5 of our articles
(1) (a) As used in this section, "image" includes print, electronic, magnetic, or digital format. (b) Terms defined in Sections 76-1-101.5, 76-12-101, and 76-12-301 apply to this section. (2) An actor commits distribution of images obtained through voyeurism if the actor distributes or sells an image obtained by conduct in violation of Section 76-12-307, Recorded or photographed voyeurism, by transmission, display, or dissemination. (3) (a) Except as provided in Subsection (3)(b), a violation of Subsection (2) is a third degree felony. (b) A violation of Subsection (2) is a second degree felony if the image is of a child under 14 years old.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Also relied on in: Utah Video Recording Laws
Utah Code, Title 77: Criminal Procedure
§ 77-23a-4Offenses -- Criminal and civil -- Lawful interception.In forcecited in 19 of our articles
(1) (a) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter, any person who violates Subsection (1)(b) is guilty of an offense and is subject to punishment under Subsection (10), or when applicable, the person is subject to civil action under Subsection (11). (b) A person commits a violation of this subsection who: (i) intentionally or knowingly intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, electronic, or oral communication; (ii) intentionally or knowingly uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication, when the device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication or when the device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of the communication; (iii) intentionally or knowingly discloses or endeavors to disclose to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire,…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-24 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. Wood (2023) held a jail's recording of inmate calls fell within the consent exception in section 77-23a-4(7)(a) because the inmate impliedly consented by using phones he was told were monitored. The Quarasan Group, Inc. v. Nozani, LLC (2020) dismissed an eavesdropping claim once Utah law governed and did not bar the recording.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wood (Utah Supreme Court 2023, 532 P.3d 997)✓A jail recorded an inmate's calls to his wife after warning him by handbook, placard and a message before each call; the Utah Supreme Court held he impliedly consented, so the interception fell within section 77-23a-4(7)(a) and suppression was denied.
- State v. Draughon (Court of Appeals of Utah 2026, 2026 UT App 52)“…rties to the call—consented to the call being recorded. See Utah Code §§ 77-23a-4(7)(b), -7. He claims Counsel should hav…”
- United States v. Maynard (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2010, 615 F.3d 544)“…ined by the police acting pursuant to a warrant. See, e.g., Utah Code Ann. §§ 77-23a-4, 77-23a-7, 77-23a-15.5; Minn Stat §§ 62…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Utah Audio Recording Laws, Utah Dashcam Laws, Utah Medical Recording Laws
United States Code Title 18
§ 1801Video voyeurismIn forcecited in 81 of our articles
Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, has the intent to capture an image of a private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly does so under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. In this section— the term “capture”, with respect to an image, means to videotape, photograph, film, record by any means, or broadcast; the term “broadcast” means to electronically transmit a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a person or persons; the term “a private area of the individual” means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast of that individual; the term “female breast” means any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola; and the term “under circumstances in which that individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy” means— circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that an image of a private area of the individual was being captured; or circumstances in which a…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 53 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Courts have applied 18 U.S.C. 1801 mainly at its edges. United States v. Johnson (2010) read it as Congress's answer to secretly filming nudity on federal property, acquitting on a child exploitation charge instead. EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security (2011) applied the Section 1801(c) law enforcement exception to a TSA scanner claim.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. Anthony Helton (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2019, 944 F.3d 198)“…from this list of federal offenses is video voyeurism under 18 U.S.C. § 1801. Rather than list this statute as an enu…”
- United States v. Johnson (District Court, W.D. Missouri 2010, 719 F. Supp. 2d 1059)✓A weightlifting coach hid a camera to film minors weighing in nude; acquitting him under the child exploitation statute, the court called that conduct plain video voyeurism under section 1801, but noted the section reaches only federal maritime and territorial jurisdiction.
- Electronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Department of Homeland Security (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2011, 653 F.3d 1)✓Privacy groups challenged TSA body scanners under the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act; the D.C. Circuit held the statute's exception for lawful law enforcement, correctional, or intelligence activity applied to airport screening, so the section 1801 claim failed.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Is It Illegal to Video Record Someone Without Their Consent? (2026), California Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Penalties and Protections (2026), Delaware Voyeurism Laws: Hidden Cameras, Penalties, and Privacy Protections (2026)
§ 2511Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibitedIn forcecited in 441 of our articles
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who— intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when— such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication; or such device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; or such person knows, or has reason to know, that such device or any component thereof has been sent through the mail or transported in interstate or foreign commerce; or such use or endeavor to use (A) takes place on the premises of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or (B) obtains or is for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the operations of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-17 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,045 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Griggs-Ryan v. Smith (1990) applied the Section 2511(2)(d) prior-consent exception, treating a tenant repeatedly told that all incoming calls were taped as having impliedly consented. United States v. United States District Court (1972) read the then-current Section 2511(3) as conferring no presidential surveillance power.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mitchell v. Forsyth (Supreme Court of the United States 1985, 472 U.S. 511)✓The Attorney General authorized a warrantless 1970 national security wiretap that caught the plaintiff's calls; the Court held the since-repealed Section 2511(3) disclaimer left the tap lawful under Title III, and that Mitchell had qualified immunity.
- United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Supreme Court of the United States 1972, 407 U.S. 297)✓The Attorney General approved warrantless wiretaps on members of a domestic group accused of bombing a CIA office; the Court read Section 2511(3) as a congressional disclaimer conferring no surveillance power, then held the Fourth Amendment required prior judicial approval.
- Forsyth v. Barr (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1994, 19 F.3d 1527)✓Dallas police used, in an internal affairs probe of an officer, calls private parties allegedly intercepted illegally; assuming that was unlawful, the Fifth Circuit held Section 2517(1) and (2) allowed the disclosure and use, defeating the Section 2511(1)(c) and (d) claims.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can an Employer Record Conversations Without Consent? (2026), Can I Record My Boss Harassing Me? State-by-State Legal Guide (2026), Can I Sue Someone for Recording Me on Private or Public Property?
Sources and References
- Utah Code Ann. 76-12-307 -- Recorded or Photographed Voyeurism(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code Ann. 77-23a-4 -- Interception of Communications(le.utah.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. 1801 -- Video Voyeurism Prevention Act(law.cornell.edu)
- 18 U.S.C. 2511 -- Federal Wiretap Act(law.cornell.edu)
- Utah Code Ann. 76-12-306 -- Voyeurism(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code Ann. 76-12-308 -- Distribution of Images Obtained Through Voyeurism(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code Ann. 76-12-302 -- Unlawful Privacy Violation (eff. May 7, 2025)(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code Ann. 76-5b-203 -- Distribution of an Intimate Image(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code Ann. 76-5b-205 -- Unlawful Distribution of a Counterfeit Intimate Image(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code Ann. 78B-6-2702 -- Civil Action for Disclosure of an Intimate Image (eff. May 6, 2026)(le.utah.gov).gov
- Utah Code Ann. 78B-6-2705 -- Remedies (eff. May 6, 2026)(le.utah.gov).gov