Utah
Utah Video Recording Laws
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 15, 2026. · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Silent video recording in public spaces is legal in Utah without restriction. When your camera captures audio of a conversation you are part of, Utah Code 77-23a-4 permits that recording under one-party consent. Utah Code 76-12-307 prohibits secret recording in locations where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Utah allows video recording in public spaces without restriction. There is no state statute that broadly prohibits filming in areas where people have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Utah's voyeurism statute (76-12-307, enacted when the 2025 criminal code recodification split the former 76-9-702.7 into three sections) creates strict limits on video recording in private settings.
This guide explains where you can and cannot use video cameras in Utah, privacy expectations, and criminal penalties for violations.
Public Video Recording in Utah
Your Right to Record in Public
Utah does not restrict video recording in public locations. You can film on public streets, sidewalks, parks, government buildings open to the public, and at public events. Video-only recording in public does not implicate Utah's wiretapping statute (77-23a-4), which focuses on audio interception.
When Public Recording Includes Audio
If your video camera captures audio, Utah's one-party consent rule applies. As long as you participate in any conversation being recorded, the audio is lawful.
Video Recording in Private Places
Utah's Voyeurism Statute (76-12-307)
Under Utah Code Ann. 76-12-307, a person commits recorded or photographed voyeurism who intentionally uses technology to secretly record an individual for the purpose of viewing any portion of the individual's body regarding which they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, without their knowledge or consent, and under circumstances where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Penalties for Voyeuristic Recording
| Offense | Classification | Maximum Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Voyeuristic recording | Class A Misdemeanor | 364 days jail |
| Distribution of voyeuristic images | Third Degree Felony | 5 years prison |
| Distribution involving child under 14 | Second Degree Felony | 15 years prison |
2025 Criminal Code Recodification
Effective May 7, 2025, Utah completed a major recodification of its criminal code. The former voyeurism statute (76-9-702.7) was repealed and its substance split into three new Title 76, Chapter 12 sections: 76-12-306 (viewing without recording), 76-12-307 (recorded or photographed voyeurism), and 76-12-308 (distribution of voyeuristic images). The penalty structure -- Class A misdemeanor for recording, third degree felony for distribution, and second degree felony for distributing images of a child under 14 -- carried over unchanged.
Video Recording in Specific Settings
Workplace
Employers can install video cameras in common areas but cannot place them in bathrooms, locker rooms, or changing areas. The NLRA restricts surveillance that chills protected concerted activity.
Security Cameras
Homeowners can install cameras on their own property. Cameras should be pointed at your property, not directly at neighbors' private areas.
Dashcams
Dashcams are legal in Utah. Video captured on public roads is lawful.
Government Meetings
Under Utah Code Ann. 52-4-203, public bodies must record their own open meetings and make recordings available within three business days. The public can also make their own recordings.
Using Video as Evidence
Video recordings made legally are generally admissible in Utah courts. Courts evaluate authentication, relevance, chain of custody, and whether probative value outweighs prejudicial effect.
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
More Utah Recording Topics
More Utah Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal to video record someone in Utah without their consent?
In public spaces, yes. You can video record anyone in public without consent. In private places where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy, secretly recording them violates Utah's voyeurism statute (76-12-307, formerly 76-9-702.7 before the 2025 recodification).
What are the penalties for voyeuristic video recording in Utah?
Voyeuristic recording is a Class A misdemeanor carrying up to 364 days in jail. Distributing voyeuristic images is a third degree felony (up to 5 years). Distribution involving a child under 14 is a second degree felony (up to 15 years).
Can I record a public meeting in Utah?
Yes. Utah's Open and Public Meetings Act (52-4-203) requires public bodies to record their meetings and allows the public to make their own recordings of open meetings.
Are hidden cameras legal in Utah?
Hidden cameras are illegal in locations where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and bedrooms. In public areas, hidden cameras are not specifically prohibited by state law.
Can I use video as evidence in Utah court?
Yes. Video recordings made in compliance with Utah law are generally admissible. The footage must be authenticated, relevant, and unaltered.
Updates
Corrected the maximum jail term for the base voyeuristic-recording misdemeanor from 1 year to the legally accurate 364 days, in both the penalties table and the FAQ.
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-recording offense: 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), 76-12-307 (recorded or photographed voyeurism, the section this page's content actually describes), and 76-12-308 (distribution) -- rather than simply renumbering one section. Updated all in-body citations and the Sources entry to 76-12-307/76-12-308, which are now the current, correct citations; the penalty tiers described (Class A misdemeanor / third degree felony / second degree felony) were verified unchanged against the official recodified text.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Audit pass: no accuracy errors found. Utah-specific citations (77-23a-4, 76-9-702.7, le.utah.gov links) verified correct.
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 10 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
§ 76-12-308Distribution of images obtained through voyeurism.In forcecited in 4 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
Utah Code, Title 52: Public Officers
§ 52-4-203Written minutes of open meetings -- Public records -- Recording of meetings.In forcecited in 4 of our articles
(1) Except as provided under Subsection (7), written minutes and a recording shall be kept of all open meetings. (2) (a) Written minutes of an open meeting shall include: (i) the date, time, and place of the meeting; (ii) the names of members present and absent; (iii) the substance of all matters proposed, discussed, or decided by the public body which may include a summary of comments made by members of the public body; (iv) a record, by individual member, of each vote taken by the public body; (v) the name of each person who: (A) is not a member of the public body; and (B) after being recognized by the presiding member of the public body, provided testimony or comments to the public body; (vi) the substance, in brief, of the testimony or comments provided by the public under Subsection (2)(a)(v); and (vii) any other information that is a record of the proceedings of the meeting that any member requests be entered in the minutes or recording.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at le.utah.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Southern Utah Wilderness v. San Juan County (Utah Supreme Court 2021, 484 P.3d 1160)“…20 UTAH CODE § 52-4-203(2)(a)(iii). 21 Id. at § 52-4-203(4…”
- Southern Utah Wilderness v. Kane County (Utah Supreme Court 2021, 484 P.3d 1146)“…43 Utah Chapter of Sierra Club, 2006 UT 74, ¶ 26. 44 UTAH CODE § 52-4-203(2)(a)(iii).…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
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 2026-08-31 · 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.
United States Code Title 18
§ 2511Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibitedIn forcecited in 418 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 2026-08-28 · 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.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
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
- Utah Code Ann. 52-4-203 -- Open and Public Meetings Act(le.utah.gov).gov
- National Labor Relations Act(nlrb.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. 2511 -- Federal Wiretap Act(law.cornell.edu)
- Utah Code Ann. 76-12-308 -- Distribution of Images Obtained Through Voyeurism(le.utah.gov).gov