Nevada
Nevada Surveillance Camera Laws (2026 Guide)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 16, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 9, 2026. · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Nevada permits security cameras on your own property but prohibits recording anywhere people hold a reasonable expectation of privacy. Several statutes govern surveillance use, including NRS 200.604 for hidden cameras and NRS 200.603 for peeping, while consent rules split between one-party consent for in-person audio and all-party consent for phone calls.
Overview of Nevada Surveillance Camera Laws
Nevada does not have a single statute that governs all aspects of surveillance camera use. Instead, several statutes within the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) work together to regulate when and where cameras, recording devices, and listening equipment may be used. The most important statutes include NRS 200.603 (peeping and spying), NRS 200.604 (capturing images of private areas), NRS 200.620 (wiretapping of wire communications), NRS 200.650 (eavesdropping on oral communications), and NRS 200.690 (penalties and civil remedies).
The central legal concept connecting these statutes is "reasonable expectation of privacy." Cameras are generally permitted in public spaces and on your own property. Recording becomes illegal when it targets private spaces, captures intimate images without consent, or records private conversations without proper authorization.
Nevada's recording consent rules are unusual because the state follows a split standard. In-person conversations require only one-party consent under NRS 200.650, meaning you can record a face-to-face conversation as long as you are a participant. However, telephone and wire communications require all-party consent under NRS 200.620, meaning every person on the call must agree before recording begins. This distinction is important for anyone using security cameras that record audio.
Home Security Camera Laws in Nevada
Nevada law permits homeowners to install security cameras on their own property. There is no statewide registration or permit requirement for residential security camera systems. However, the placement and capabilities of your cameras must comply with state privacy laws.
Where You Can Place Home Security Cameras
You can legally place cameras in the following areas of your property:
- Front doors and porch areas to monitor visitors and package deliveries
- Driveways and garages to record vehicle and pedestrian activity
- Backyards aimed at your own property
- Common indoor areas such as living rooms, kitchens, and hallways
- Exterior walls focused on your property boundaries and any adjacent public areas
Where You Cannot Place Home Security Cameras
Cameras become illegal when they record areas where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy:
- Bathrooms and restrooms in your home where guests or household members expect privacy
- Guest bedrooms where visitors are staying
- Aimed directly into a neighbor's windows or interior living spaces
- Any location where someone is undressing or engaged in private activities
Under NRS 200.604, it is unlawful to knowingly and intentionally capture an image of another person's private area without that person's consent and under circumstances in which the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. The statute defines "private area" as the naked or undergarment-clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast. It defines "capture" as videotaping, photographing, filming, recording by any means, or broadcasting.
Ring Doorbells and Smart Cameras
Video doorbells and smart security cameras from manufacturers such as Ring, Nest, and Arlo are legal in Nevada. These devices typically record your own porch, driveway, and the public sidewalk or street in front of your home. Because those areas are in public view, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, and video recording is permitted.
However, if your doorbell camera or smart camera captures a wide angle that includes a neighbor's interior spaces through their windows, this could raise privacy concerns under Nevada law. Position smart cameras to focus primarily on your own property and public areas.
Audio Recording on Home Security Cameras
Many modern security cameras include built-in microphones. In Nevada, audio recording rules depend on the type of communication being captured.
For in-person conversations picked up by outdoor cameras, NRS 200.650 applies. This statute prohibits surreptitiously listening to, monitoring, or recording any private conversation unless authorized by at least one person engaged in the conversation. Since you are not a participant in conversations that happen to occur near your outdoor camera, recording those conversations without any participant's consent could violate this law.
The safest approach for outdoor cameras with microphones is to either disable audio recording or post visible signage indicating that audio and video recording is in progress. Anyone who continues a conversation within range of a clearly marked camera has arguably given implied consent.
Audio Recording Consent Rules in Nevada
Nevada's consent rules are split between two separate standards depending on the type of communication.
In-Person Conversations: One-Party Consent
NRS 200.650 governs oral communications that occur face to face. The statute provides that a person shall not intrude upon the privacy of other persons by surreptitiously listening to, monitoring, or recording any private conversation engaged in by the other persons, or disclose the existence, content, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of any conversation so listened to, monitored, or recorded, unless authorized to do so by one of the persons engaging in the conversation.
This means that if you are a participant in a face-to-face conversation, you may legally record it without informing the other party. You may also authorize a third party to record the conversation on your behalf.
Telephone and Wire Communications: All-Party Consent
NRS 200.620 governs wire communications, including telephone calls, cellphone calls, and text messages. Under this statute, it is unlawful for any person to intercept or attempt to intercept any wire communication unless the interception is made with the prior consent of one of the parties to the communication and an emergency situation exists making it impractical to obtain a court order.
In practice, this means all parties must consent before a phone call can be recorded. The leading Nevada Supreme Court authority is Lane v. Allstate Ins. Co., 114 Nev. 1176, 969 P.2d 938 (Nev. 1998), a fractured four-opinion decision in which a majority of the justices agreed that NRS 200.620 bars recording a telephone conversation without the consent of every party, even for a participant recording their own call.
Why This Matters for Surveillance Cameras
Security cameras with audio capabilities can pick up both in-person conversations and phone calls. If your camera records someone's phone conversation without that person's consent, you could be violating the all-party consent rule under NRS 200.620, even if you would be within your rights to record an in-person conversation under NRS 200.650. This is one of the strongest reasons to disable audio recording on outdoor security cameras or to provide clear notice that recording is taking place.
Workplace Surveillance Camera Laws in Nevada
Nevada does not have a single statute specifically governing workplace video surveillance. Employers in the state generally rely on federal law, common-law privacy principles, and the state recording statutes when deciding where to install cameras at work.
What Employers Can Do
Employers may install video surveillance cameras in common work areas, including:
- Lobbies, hallways, and reception areas for security purposes
- Parking lots to protect employees and company property
- Warehouses, production floors, and retail spaces to monitor operations
- Cash register areas to prevent theft
- Loading docks and entry points for security
What Employers Cannot Do
Even without a dedicated workplace surveillance statute, employers face restrictions based on state privacy laws and federal guidelines:
- Restrooms and changing areas should never be filmed. Nevada has no statute banning camera placement in those rooms outright, but a camera there will almost inevitably capture an image of a person's private area, which is a crime under NRS 200.604
- Locker rooms where employees change clothes carry the same exposure and should never be filmed
- Union meeting areas are protected under the National Labor Relations Act
- Private offices where an employee has a reasonable expectation of privacy may require notice before cameras are installed
Audio Surveillance at Work
Employers who use cameras with audio recording capabilities must comply with Nevada's recording statutes. Under NRS 200.650, recording in-person workplace conversations requires the consent of at least one party to the conversation. Employers cannot secretly record private conversations between employees when no party to the conversation has consented.
The best practice for employers is to provide written notice to all employees that audio and video surveillance is in use and to obtain signed acknowledgments. This creates a record of implied consent and reduces legal exposure.
Employee Notification
While Nevada does not require employers to notify employees of video-only surveillance by statute, providing notice is strongly recommended. A clear workplace surveillance policy should outline where cameras are located, whether audio is recorded, how footage is stored, who has access to recordings, and how long recordings are retained. This transparency helps employers avoid invasion of privacy claims.
State Building Surveillance
NRS 331.220 specifically prohibits surreptitious electronic surveillance on the grounds of any facility owned or leased by the State of Nevada without the knowledge of the person being observed. Exceptions exist for surveillance authorized by court order, conducted by law enforcement during criminal investigations, performed by peace officers, or used as part of a security system to protect persons on the premises.
Hidden Camera Laws in Nevada
Nevada treats hidden cameras seriously through multiple statutes that address different aspects of covert recording.
NRS 200.604: Capturing Images of Private Areas
NRS 200.604 prohibits two specific acts:
-
Capturing images: A person shall not knowingly and intentionally capture an image of another person's private area without the other person's consent and under circumstances in which the other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
-
Distributing images: A person shall not distribute, disclose, display, transmit, or publish an image that the person knows or has reason to know was made in violation of the capture prohibition.
The statute defines "private area" as the naked or undergarment-clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast. A person has a "reasonable expectation of privacy" when they believe they could disrobe privately or that their private area would not be visible to the public.
Images obtained during violations are treated as confidential in court records, investigative reports, and criminal history repositories. Law enforcement and correctional activities involving the capture and distribution of such images for investigation or prosecution are exempt.
Penalties for Hidden Camera Violations Under NRS 200.604
| Offense | Classification | Maximum Jail/Prison Time | Maximum Fine |
|---|---|---|---|
| First offense | Gross Misdemeanor | Up to 364 days | $2,000 |
| Subsequent offenses | Category E Felony | 1 to 4 years (probation possible) | $5,000 |
NRS 200.603: Peeping or Spying
NRS 200.603 addresses the physical act of entering another person's property with the intent to surreptitiously conceal oneself and peer, peep, or spy through a window, door, or other opening of a building or structure used as a dwelling. The penalties vary based on what the person possesses at the time of the offense:
| Circumstance | Classification | Maximum Prison Time | Maximum Fine |
|---|---|---|---|
| With a deadly weapon | Category B Felony | 1 to 6 years | $5,000 |
| With a recording device (camera, etc.) | Gross Misdemeanor | Up to 364 days | $2,000 |
| Without a weapon or recording device | Misdemeanor | Up to 6 months | $1,000 |
Exemptions apply for law enforcement conducting investigations, building inspectors performing official duties, and public utility employees carrying out their work.
Nanny Cam Laws in Nevada
Nanny cameras are hidden cameras used to monitor caregivers in your home. Nevada law allows video-only nanny cams in most parts of your home, but there are important restrictions.
Where You Can Place a Nanny Cam
- Living rooms and family rooms where childcare takes place
- Kitchens and dining areas
- Playrooms and nurseries
- Hallways and entryways
Where You Cannot Place a Nanny Cam
- Bathrooms used by the caregiver
- Bedrooms designated for the caregiver's private use (for live-in nannies)
- Any room where the caregiver changes clothes or has a reasonable expectation of privacy
Placing a camera in any of these locations could violate NRS 200.604 if the camera captures images of private body areas.
Audio Recording on Nanny Cams
This is where Nevada law creates significant restrictions. If your nanny cam records audio, you must consider both NRS 200.650 and NRS 200.620.
For in-person conversations captured by the nanny cam, NRS 200.650 requires the consent of at least one party to the conversation. Since you are not present during the conversations being recorded, and neither party to those conversations has consented, recording audio without the caregiver's knowledge could violate the eavesdropping statute.
If the nanny cam picks up the caregiver's phone calls, the all-party consent rule under NRS 200.620 applies, making any recording of those calls without consent illegal.
The safest approach is to either disable audio recording on nanny cams or inform the caregiver in writing that audio and video recording takes place in the home. This written notice serves as documentation and allows the caregiver to give informed consent.
Neighbor Disputes Over Security Cameras
Disagreements between neighbors about security cameras are common in Nevada, particularly in the Las Vegas and Reno metro areas where homes are built close together. Nevada law provides guidance on resolving these disputes.
When a Neighbor's Camera Is Legal
A neighbor's security camera is generally legal if it:
- Is pointed at the neighbor's own property
- Captures public areas such as sidewalks and streets
- Records only video of areas in public view
- Does not peer into your windows or private enclosed spaces
When a Neighbor's Camera May Be Illegal
A neighbor's camera may violate Nevada law if it:
- Is deliberately aimed to look inside your home through windows
- Records your fenced backyard from an elevated position, capturing areas hidden from street view
- Records audio of your private conversations without your consent
- Is a hidden camera placed on your property without your knowledge
- Captures images of you or your family in areas where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy
A neighbor's camera that peers over your fence into your driveway or swimming pool area could constitute the tort of intrusion upon seclusion. This civil claim requires showing that the plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy and that the defendant's intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.
Steps to Resolve a Camera Dispute
-
Talk to your neighbor. Many disputes arise from cameras that were not intentionally aimed at your property. A polite conversation can often lead to a simple adjustment of the camera angle.
-
Document the situation. If the camera clearly invades your privacy, take photos or video showing the camera's position and the view it captures.
-
Send a written request. Ask your neighbor in writing to adjust the camera angle or position. Keep a copy for your records.
-
Contact local authorities. If you believe a neighbor is using a camera to capture images of your private areas, file a police report. That conduct carries criminal penalties under NRS 200.604. NRS 200.603 applies only if the person came onto your property and concealed himself or herself there to peer inside, so it does not reach a camera mounted on the neighbor's own house.
-
Consult an attorney. You may have grounds for a civil invasion of privacy lawsuit if a neighbor's camera is deliberately aimed to capture your private activities.
Physical Solutions
You can take steps to block a camera's view of your property:
- Install privacy fencing along your property line (check local building codes and HOA rules first)
- Plant tall hedges or trees to create natural barriers
- Use window film or curtains to block interior views
- Install your own cameras to document any intrusive behavior
Note that Nevada prohibits spite fences. A property owner may not put up a fence that serves no purpose other than to annoy a neighbor. Any fence should serve a legitimate purpose such as privacy, security, or aesthetic improvement.
Vacation Rentals and Airbnb Properties
Nevada has a significant short-term rental market, particularly in Las Vegas and surrounding areas. Property owners who rent through platforms such as Airbnb must follow strict rules about surveillance cameras.
Rules for Hosts
Property owners risk legal action for violating guest privacy if they place cameras near bedroom or bathroom windows or anywhere inside the rental accommodations. Nevada privacy laws under NRS 200.604 prohibit photographing or filming guests without their consent in areas where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Outdoor cameras monitoring the exterior of the property, such as the front door, driveway, or backyard entrance, are generally permitted. However, hosts should disclose the presence and location of all cameras in their listing description.
As of April 2024, Airbnb prohibits the use of surveillance cameras inside accommodations to prioritize guest privacy.
Legal Remedies for Guests
Guests who discover hidden cameras in a Nevada vacation rental may pursue legal action. Nevada has a two-year statute of limitations for personal injury cases and cases based on invasion of privacy. The main civil path is a common-law intrusion upon seclusion claim, which can support actual and punitive damages. The statutory damages in NRS 200.690 do not reach a video-only camera: that provision creates liability only to a person whose wire or oral communication was intercepted in violation of NRS 200.620 to 200.650, so it applies to a hidden camera only when the device also recorded audio. A camera that captures images of a guest's private areas is a crime under NRS 200.604, but that statute carries no private right of action.
HOA and Local Regulations
In addition to state law, homeowners in Nevada may be subject to additional surveillance camera rules imposed by their homeowners association (HOA) or local municipality.
HOA Camera Rules
Nevada does not have a statewide law governing HOA security camera policies. However, your HOA's covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) may include rules about camera placement, visibility, and positioning. Common HOA restrictions include requirements that cameras be aesthetically discreet, prohibitions on cameras aimed at common areas managed by the HOA, and rules about notification to the association before installation.
Before installing cameras in an HOA community, review your governing documents or contact your HOA board for guidance.
Local Ordinances
Some Nevada cities and counties may have additional regulations regarding security cameras. Clark County (Las Vegas area) and Washoe County (Reno area) may have building permit requirements or specific rules about camera installations on rental properties. Check with your local city hall, county clerk's office, or building department for any applicable ordinances.
Penalties Summary for Surveillance Violations in Nevada
| Violation | Statute | Classification | Max Jail/Prison | Max Fine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wiretapping (recording phone calls without consent) | NRS 200.620 / NRS 200.690 | Category D Felony | 1 to 4 years | $5,000 |
| Eavesdropping (recording in-person conversations without consent) | NRS 200.650 / NRS 200.690 | Category D Felony | 1 to 4 years | $5,000 |
| Capturing images of private areas (1st offense) | NRS 200.604 | Gross Misdemeanor | Up to 364 days | $2,000 |
| Capturing images of private areas (subsequent) | NRS 200.604 | Category E Felony | 1 to 4 years (probation possible) | $5,000 |
| Distribution of illegally captured images | NRS 200.604 | Gross Misdemeanor / Category E Felony | Same as above | Same as above |
| Peeping/spying with deadly weapon | NRS 200.603 | Category B Felony | 1 to 6 years | $5,000 |
| Peeping/spying with recording device | NRS 200.603 | Gross Misdemeanor | Up to 364 days | $2,000 |
| Peeping/spying without weapon or device | NRS 200.603 | Misdemeanor | Up to 6 months | $1,000 |
| Surreptitious surveillance on state property | NRS 331.220 | Varies | Varies | Varies |
Civil Penalties
In addition to criminal penalties, NRS 200.690 provides civil remedies for victims of illegal surveillance. A person whose wire or oral communication is intercepted without consent may recover:
- Actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation, whichever is greater
- A minimum of $1,000 in liquidated damages
- Punitive damages at the court's discretion
- Attorney's fees and court costs reasonably incurred in the action
Tenant Security Camera Rights in Nevada
If you rent your home in Nevada, you have certain rights and restrictions when it comes to installing security cameras.
Indoor Cameras
Tenants may install cameras inside their rental in common areas such as living rooms, kitchens, and entryways. Cameras are prohibited in shared bathrooms and guest bedrooms where others have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Outdoor Cameras
Outdoor cameras typically require landlord permission because they may constitute exterior property alterations. Always obtain written consent for outdoor cameras and confirm that they only capture your immediate rental area. Smart doorbells and cameras with microphones should have audio recording disabled unless you have explicit written consent from everyone who may be recorded.
Lease Agreement Review
Before installing any cameras, review your lease agreement for clauses about property alterations, exterior modifications, or surveillance equipment. Some leases specifically address camera installation. If your lease is silent on the topic, request written permission from your landlord before proceeding.
Related Nevada Camera and Privacy Laws
- Nevada Recording Laws covers the consent rule that governs camera audio in Nevada.
- Nevada Security Camera Recording Rules explains the recording-law side of camera use.
- Nevada Biometric Privacy Laws addresses facial recognition and biometric data.
- Nevada Ring Doorbell Laws covers video doorbell rules in Nevada.
Common Camera Questions
These national guides answer the most common surveillance camera questions:
- HOA Security Camera Rules
- Neighbor Security Camera Laws
- Nanny Cam Laws
- Workplace Surveillance Camera Laws
- Landlord Security Camera Laws
More Nevada Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Nevada a one-party or two-party consent state for recording?
Nevada uses a mixed consent framework. For in-person conversations, Nevada is a one-party consent state under NRS 200.650, meaning you can record a face-to-face conversation as long as you are a participant. For telephone and wire communications, Nevada is an all-party consent state under NRS 200.620, meaning every person on the call must agree before recording begins. The leading Nevada Supreme Court authority on this point is Lane v. Allstate Ins. Co. (1998), a fractured decision in which a majority of the justices agreed that NRS 200.620 requires the consent of every party to a recorded telephone call.
Can my neighbor legally point a security camera at my house in Nevada?
It depends on what the camera captures. A neighbor's camera may legally record their own property and public areas like sidewalks or streets, even if your home appears in the background. However, if the camera is deliberately aimed to look inside your windows, into your fenced backyard, or into areas where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, it could give rise to a civil invasion of privacy claim. If the camera records audio of your private conversations without your consent, it may violate NRS 200.650. You can ask the neighbor to adjust the camera, file a police report, or consult an attorney.
Are nanny cams legal in Nevada?
Video-only nanny cams are legal in common areas of your home such as living rooms, kitchens, and playrooms. However, cameras cannot be placed in bathrooms or private bedrooms used by the caregiver. If your nanny cam records audio, you must comply with NRS 200.650, which requires the consent of at least one party to any conversation being recorded. Since you are not present during the conversations, the safest approach is to inform the caregiver in writing that audio and video recording takes place in the home, or disable audio recording entirely.
Can my employer use security cameras at work in Nevada?
Yes, but with restrictions. Nevada employers may install video cameras in common work areas such as lobbies, hallways, production floors, and parking lots. Nevada has no statute that bans camera placement in a restroom or locker room outright, but employers should never film those spaces: NRS 200.604 makes it a crime to knowingly and intentionally capture an image of a person's private area where that person reasonably expects privacy, and a camera in a changing space will capture exactly that. Filming those areas also invites an invasion of privacy claim. If cameras record audio, employers must comply with NRS 200.650. The best practice is to notify employees about all surveillance through written policies and visible signage.
What are the penalties for illegal surveillance in Nevada?
Penalties vary by offense. Illegally recording phone calls or in-person conversations under NRS 200.620 through NRS 200.650 is a category D felony, punishable by 1 to 4 years in state prison and up to $5,000 in fines. Capturing images of someone's private areas without consent under NRS 200.604 is a gross misdemeanor for a first offense (up to 364 days in jail and $2,000 fine) and a category E felony for subsequent offenses. Peeping or spying with a recording device under NRS 200.603, which requires entering another person's property and concealing oneself there, is a gross misdemeanor. Victims may also pursue civil remedies including actual damages or $100 per day (minimum $1,000), punitive damages, and attorney's fees under NRS 200.690.
Updates
Corrected the statutes cited for hidden-camera remedies, neighbor peeping complaints and workplace restroom cameras, and repaired every link to the Nevada Revised Statutes so it opens the cited section.
Replaced a fabricated case citation, "Sharpe v. Nevada, 350 P.3d 388 (Nev. 2015)," which does not exist, with the real controlling authority on Nevada's all-party consent rule for phone calls: Lane v. Allstate Ins. Co., 969 P.2d 938 (Nev. 1998), a fractured Nevada Supreme Court decision.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
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.
Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 200: CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON
§ 200.604Capturing image of private area of another person; distributing, disclosing, displaying, transmitting or publishing image of private area of another person; penalties; exceptions; confidentiality of image.In forcecited in 15 of our articles
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, a person shall not knowingly and intentionally capture an image of the private area of another person: (a) Without the consent of the other person; and (b) Under circumstances in which the other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. 2. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4, a person shall not distribute, disclose, display, transmit or publish an image that the person knows or has reason to know was made in violation of subsection 1. 3. Unless a greater penalty is provided pursuant to NRS 200.780 or 212.188, a person who violates this section: (a) For a first offense, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. (b) For a second or subsequent offense, is guilty of a category E felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130. 4. This section does not prohibit any lawful law enforcement or correctional activity, including, without limitation, capturing, distributing, disclosing, displaying, transmitting or publishing an image for the purpose of investigating or prosecuting a violation of this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Coleman v. State (Nevada Supreme Court 2018, 416 P.3d 238)“…By the Court, PICKERING, J.: NRS 200.604 prohibits a person from knowingly and i…”
- COLEMAN (SOLOMON) VS. STATE (Nevada Supreme Court 2018, 2018 NV 28)“…y the Court, PICKERING, J.: NRS 200.604 prohibits a person from knowingly and…”
- Brian Olsen v. City of Henderson (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2016, 648 F. App'x 628)“…amily. Nichols reasonably believed that Olsen had violated Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.604 by capturing and publishing to his per…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Nevada Smart Glasses Recording Laws 2026, Nevada Recording Laws (2026): All-Party for Calls, One-Party in Person, Nevada Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Rights for Renters and Property Owners (2026)
§ 200.603Peering, peeping or spying through window, door or other opening of dwelling of another; penalties.In force
1. A person shall not knowingly enter upon the property or premises of another or upon the property or premises owned by him or her and leased or rented to another with the intent to surreptitiously conceal himself or herself on the property or premises and peer, peep or spy through a window, door or other opening of a building or structure that is used as a dwelling on the property or premises. 2. A person who violates subsection 1 is guilty of: (a) If the person is in possession of a deadly weapon at the time of the violation, a category B felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 6 years, and may be further punished by a fine of not more than $5,000. (b) If the person is not in possession of a deadly weapon at the time of the violation, but is in possession of a photographic or digital camera, video camera or other device capable of recording images or sound at the time of the violation, a gross misdemeanor.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- STATE, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GEN. VS. JUSTICE CT. (ESCALANTE) (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 12)“…penalty is provided pursuant to NRS 200.603, any person who, under circumstances…”
- United States v. Watkins (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2026)“…2;1 Mont. Code Ann. 45-5-223;3 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-311.08; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 200.603;3 N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann § 644:9;1 (in par…”
- Cope v. State of Nevada (District Court, D. Nevada 2020)“…1 1. Unless a greater penalty is provided pursuant to NRS 200.603, any person who, under circums…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 200.650Unauthorized, surreptitious intrusion of privacy by listening device prohibited.In forcecited in 25 of our articles
Except as otherwise provided in NRS 179.410 to 179.515, inclusive, and 704.195, a person shall not intrude upon the privacy of other persons by surreptitiously listening to, monitoring or recording, or attempting to listen to, monitor or record, by means of any mechanical, electronic or other listening device, any private conversation engaged in by the other persons, or disclose the existence, content, substance, purport, effect or meaning of any conversation so listened to, monitored or recorded, unless authorized to do so by one of the persons engaging in the conversation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-26 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 13 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Nevada courts read NRS 200.650 to permit a recording authorized by a participant. Summers v. State (1986) upheld a body-wire recording because the informant taking part in the conversation authorized it. Abid v. Abid (2017) held the section carries no suppression rule, so a custody expert could consider recordings made in violation of it.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lane v. Allstate Insurance (Nevada Supreme Court 1998, 114 Nev. 1176)✓A former employee secretly taped hundreds of phone calls with company personnel; the court read NRS 200.650 as allowing in-person private conversations to be recorded when one participant authorizes it, and contrasted that in holding NRS 200.620 bars one-party taping of calls.
- Summers v. State (Nevada Supreme Court 1986, 102 Nev. 195)✓Police taped a transmitter to an informant, who recorded his conversation with Summers about the murder guns; the court held such a recording needs no court order so long as the authorization requirement of NRS 200.650 is met, and the informant had authorized it.
- ABID VS. ABID (CHILD CUSTODY) (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 94)“…to this recording, the father's actions likely violated NRS 200.650, which prohibits the…”
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 You Record ICE Agents? Know Your Rights by State (2026), Federal Wiretap Act and ECPA: The Complete Guide (2026)
§ 200.620Interception and attempted interception of wire communication prohibited; exceptions.In forcecited in 38 of our articles
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 5 and NRS 179.410 to 179.515, inclusive, 209.419 and 704.195, it is unlawful for any person to intercept or attempt to intercept any wire communication unless: (a) The interception or attempted interception is made with the prior consent of one of the parties to the communication; and (b) An emergency situation exists and it is impractical to obtain a court order as required by NRS 179.410 to 179.515, inclusive, before the interception, in which event the interception is subject to the requirements of subsection 3. If the application for ratification is denied, any use or disclosure of the information so intercepted is unlawful, and the person who made the interception shall notify the sender and the receiver of the communication that: (1) The communication was intercepted; and (2) Upon application to the court, ratification of the interception was denied.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 18 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Nevada reads NRS 200.620 as an all-party consent rule for phone recording, with a territorial limit. Lane v. Allstate Insurance held a participant who taped his own calls without the other parties' consent violated it; DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC VS. BUCKLES held it does not reach calls recorded from outside Nevada.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lane v. Allstate Insurance (Nevada Supreme Court 1998, 114 Nev. 1176)✓A former employee secretly taped hundreds of his own phone calls with his ex-employer's staff to build his suit; the court held NRS 200.620 bars recording a call without every party's consent, so the tapes were excluded and the dismissal of his suit was reversed.
- State v. Reyes (Nevada Supreme Court 1991, 107 Nev. 191)✓Police had an interpreter listen on a station extension phone while an informant set up a drug buy; the court held that officers' use of regularly installed telephone equipment in the ordinary course of their duties is not an interception under NRS 200.620.
- ABID VS. ABID (CHILD CUSTODY) (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 94)“…corded phone conversations in violation of NRS 200.620 to obtain evidence to support tort…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Is Plaud HIPAA Compliant? Kind Of. Here's What to Know (2026), One-Party Consent States: Complete 2026 Guide, Georgia Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Audio, All-Party Video
§ 200.690Penalties.In forcecited in 18 of our articles
1. A person who willfully and knowingly violates NRS 200.620 to 200.650, inclusive: (a) Shall be punished for a category D felony as provided in NRS 193.130. (b) Is liable to a person whose wire or oral communication is intercepted without his or her consent for: (1) Actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation but not less than $1,000, whichever is greater; (2) Punitive damages; and (3) His or her costs reasonably incurred in the action, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, Ê all of which may be recovered by civil action. 2. A good faith reliance by a public utility on a written request for interception by one party to a conversation is a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought against the public utility on account of the interception.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lane v. Allstate Insurance (Nevada Supreme Court 1998, 114 Nev. 1176)“…shable as “a category D felony as provided in NRS 193.130.” NRS 200.690(l)(a). In addition, the violator is lia…”
- ABID VS. ABID (CHILD CUSTODY) (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 94)“…regarding evidence and admissibility. See NRS 200.690(1) (enforcing NRS 200.650 exclusively…”
- DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC VS. BUCKLES (Nevada Supreme Court 2017, 2017 NV 64)“…ons without Buckles's consent.' 1 NRS 200.690(1)(b) provides a private right of actio…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Nevada Audio Recording Laws: Split Consent Rules and Penalties (2026), Nevada Dashcam Laws: Legal Rules for Dashboard Cameras (2026), Nevada Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights and Healthcare Privacy (2026)
Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 331: ADMINISTRATION AND CONTROL OF STATE BUILDINGS, GROUNDS AND PROPERTIES
§ 331.220Surreptitious electronic surveillance prohibited; exceptions.In force
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, it is unlawful for a person to engage in any kind of surreptitious electronic surveillance on the grounds of any facility owned or leased by the State of Nevada without the knowledge of the person being observed. 2. Subsection 1 does not apply to any electronic surveillance: (a) Authorized by a court order issued to a public officer, based upon a showing of probable cause to believe that criminal activity is occurring on the property under surveillance; (b) By a law enforcement agency pursuant to a criminal investigation; (c) By a peace officer pursuant to NRS 289.830; or (d) Which is necessary as part of a system of security used to protect and ensure the safety of persons on the grounds of the facility.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.nv.us
Sources and References
- NRS 200.604: Capturing Image of Private Area of Another Person(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 200.603: Peering, Peeping or Spying Through Window or Door of Dwelling(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 200.620: Interception and Attempted Interception of Wire Communication(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 200.650: Unauthorized Surreptitious Intrusion of Privacy by Listening Device(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 200.690: Penalties for Wiretapping and Eavesdropping Violations(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- NRS 331.220: Surreptitious Electronic Surveillance on State Property Prohibited(leg.state.nv.us).gov
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press: Nevada Recording Guide(rcfp.org)
- Lane v. Allstate Ins. Co., 114 Nev. 1176, 969 P.2d 938 (Nev. 1998)(courtlistener.com)
- FTC: Ring Employees Illegally Surveilled Customers (2023)(ftc.gov).gov
- NRS 200.604: Capturing Image of Private Area of Another Person(leg.state.nv.us)
- NRS 200.603: Peering, Peeping or Spying Through Window or Door of Dwelling(leg.state.nv.us)
- NRS 200.620: Interception and Attempted Interception of Wire Communication(leg.state.nv.us)
- NRS 200.650: Unauthorized Surreptitious Intrusion of Privacy by Listening Device(leg.state.nv.us)
- NRS 200.690: Penalties and Civil Liability for Wiretapping and Eavesdropping Violations(leg.state.nv.us)
- NRS 331.220: Surreptitious Electronic Surveillance on State Property Prohibited(leg.state.nv.us)