California Police Body Camera Laws: Footage & Access

In California, a bodycam or dashcam recording of a "critical incident," an officer discharging a firearm at a person or using force that causes death or great bodily injury, must generally be released to the public within 45 days of a request under Government Code § 7923.625, part of the California Public Records Act.

This guide is part of our Police Bodycam Laws by State series.

Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses California state law on public access to police body-worn camera and dashcam footage, primarily Government Code § 7923.625 (critical incident recordings). It touches on the related Penal Code § 832.7(b) personnel-records disclosure law without covering it in depth, and does not address a civilian's right to record police, which is covered separately in our guide to recording laws.

Does California require police to use body cameras?

California has no single statewide statute that forces every law enforcement agency to equip officers with body cameras. Adoption has instead happened department by department, driven by local policy, city council decisions, and, in many departments, Department of Justice or Board of State and Community Corrections grant funding rather than a state mandate. In practice, most large California police departments and sheriff's offices, including the Los Angeles Police Department, the San Francisco Police Department, and the California Highway Patrol, use body cameras under their own policies. What California does regulate closely by statute is not whether an agency must have cameras, but what an agency must do with certain categories of footage once it exists, particularly footage from the most serious incidents.

The 45-day critical incident disclosure rule

California's core bodycam-access statute is Government Code § 7923.625, part of the California Public Records Act. It requires that video or audio recordings of a "critical incident" be made available to the public on request. A critical incident is an incident involving the discharge of a firearm at a person by a peace officer or custodial officer, or an incident in which an officer's use of force against a person results in death or great bodily injury, according to the California Legislative Information site. The statute was originally enacted as Assembly Bill 748 in 2018 (approved by the governor on September 30, 2018, effective July 1, 2019), which amended former Government Code § 6254(f); the CPRA was renumbered in 2023 and the same substantive rule now lives at § 7923.625. The default rule is disclosure "at the earliest possible time," and no later than 45 calendar days after the agency knew or reasonably should have known about the incident.

When can a California agency delay releasing footage?

An agency may delay disclosure beyond the 45-day default if it determines that releasing the recording would substantially interfere with an active criminal or administrative investigation, for example by identifying a confidential witness or compromising an ongoing forensic process. When an agency delays, § 7923.625 requires it to state in writing the specific basis for concluding disclosure would interfere with the investigation, along with the estimated date of disclosure. That delay can run up to one year from the date the agency knew or should have known about the incident. Beyond one year, further delay is allowed only if the agency can show, by clear and convincing evidence, a continuing basis for withholding. Throughout any delay, the agency must reassess the justification and update the requester at least every 30 days, according to the California Legislative Information site. Redaction is permitted to protect a legitimate privacy interest, such as blurring a bystander's face, but the statute does not allow redaction that would prevent the public from fully and accurately understanding what the video depicts.

Watch out: The 45-day clock applies specifically to "critical incident" recordings (firearm discharges at a person, and force causing death or great bodily injury). Bodycam footage from a routine traffic stop or an arrest with no serious injury does not fall under this specific timeline; it is instead subject to the California Public Records Act's more general request-and-response process, which can move faster or slower depending on the agency and any applicable exemptions.

The related, separate California law on officer misconduct records

California readers researching bodycam access will often run into a second, related law: Penal Code § 832.7(b), the peace officer personnel-records disclosure statute created by Senate Bill 1421 (2018) and expanded by Senate Bill 16 (2021). That law requires agencies to disclose specified peace officer personnel records where there has been a sustained finding of an officer's dishonesty, a sustained finding of sexual assault, a sustained finding of excessive or unreasonable force, or a sustained finding that an officer failed to intervene against another officer using excessive force, according to the California Legislative Information site. This is a distinct legal track from the critical-incident video rule in Government Code § 7923.625: SB 1421 and SB 16 govern an officer's personnel and disciplinary file, while § 7923.625 governs the recording itself, independent of whether any misconduct is ultimately found. A single serious incident can trigger disclosure obligations under both statutes at once, which is part of why the two are often discussed together, but they are not the same law and have separate release procedures.

How long is bodycam footage kept in California?

California does not set a single statewide retention period for all body camera footage in Government Code § 7923.625 itself; the statute is focused on disclosure timing once a request is made, not on how long an agency must keep a recording before it may be deleted. Retention schedules for police records generally, including bodycam video, are instead set by each agency's own records-retention policy, subject to the state's general local-government records-retention framework and the practical reality that footage tied to a critical incident, an open investigation, or pending litigation must be preserved for as long as that matter remains active. Departments commonly retain routine, non-evidentiary footage for a period measured in months, while footage connected to a shooting, a death, or a lawsuit is typically held far longer, often for years, to satisfy litigation-hold and evidence-preservation obligations.

Is a civilian allowed to record the police in California?

That is a different question from what this page addresses. California generally applies its two-party consent wiretap law to private conversations, but recording an on-duty officer performing public duties in public is treated differently under well-established First Amendment case law. For the full explanation, see Is It Illegal to Record Someone?