Recording Law for Police & Civil Rights in Utah

In Utah, you can record on-duty police officers performing official duties in public without it being illegal. State law says recording a peace officer with a camera or phone while they’re doing their job in plain view "does not by itself constitute" interference, resisting, disorderly conduct, or obstruction of justice. This is written directly in Utah Code § 76-8-305(4). On top of that, a federal appeals court covering Utah has ruled that the First Amendment protects the right to record police officers performing their official duties in public. That ruling, from the Tenth Circuit in Irizarry v. Yehia (2022), held that the right to record was "clearly established" as of the 2019 incident at issue in that case. The only limit is that you must follow lawful orders from officers, such as moving back if they tell you to, but simply recording does not violate the law.

Utah follows a one-party consent rule for audio recording, but with an important caveat for in-person conversations. That means you can record any conversation you’re part of without telling the other person, provided the conversation qualifies as a protected "oral communication." This is covered under Utah’s Interception of Communications Act, specifically Utah Code § 77-23a-4. The law says you can record if you’re a party to the communication or have one party’s consent, unless you’re doing it to commit a crime or tort. For in-person conversations, the statute defines an "oral communication" as an utterance made with a justified expectation it is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying that expectation. Phone calls and electronic communications do not carry this expectation-of-privacy element, so the one-party rule applies to them regardless of either party’s privacy expectations. Importantly, the one-party consent rule applies to all three types of communications once they are covered by the statute.

If you record video without capturing audio, a different rule applies. Utah law treats video-only recording separately from audio recording. The wiretap statute only covers the interception of wire, electronic, or oral communications, so silent video doesn’t trigger the one-party consent rule. However, a separate privacy law, Utah Code § 76-12-302, bars installing or using a device to observe, photograph, or record in a "private place" without consent. A private place is defined as "a place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from casual or hostile intrusion or surveillance." This means recording video in a public space is allowed because such places are not "private places" under the statute, but recording inside someone’s home without their consent could raise issues under Utah’s separate privacy statute, which bars installing or using a device to observe or record in a private place without consent, though a homeowner’s own consent likely suffices for their own recording. The key difference is the location and whether it’s a private space.

While recording police in public is protected, you still must follow lawful orders. Utah Code § 76-8-305(4) makes clear that recording itself "does not by itself constitute" interference, resisting, disorderly conduct, or obstruction of justice, but the surrounding law still prohibits actions like refusing a lawful order or obstructing an officer. For example, if an officer tells you to step back from a crime scene and you refuse, you could face charges even if you’re recording. The law protects your right to record, but not your right to ignore lawful commands. Always comply with clear, lawful instructions from officers to avoid separate legal trouble.

Imagine you’re pulled over by a Utah highway patrol officer. You start recording the interaction with your phone. The officer sees you recording but continues the stop. Under Utah law, this recording cannot lawfully result in your arrest solely for recording, because it’s happening in public and the officer is performing official duties. The officer cannot lawfully arrest you solely for recording, and the footage cannot be deleted solely because it was recorded. If the officer tells you to move your phone away from the window, you must comply to avoid charges like disorderly conduct. But if they try to stop you from recording entirely, that would violate your rights under both state and federal law.

If an officer tells you to stop recording, calmly state that you know your rights under Utah law and the First Amendment. You can mention that Utah Code § 76-8-305(4) provides that recording a peace officer performing official duties in plain view "does not by itself constitute" interference, though it is not an absolute right and you must still comply with lawful orders. If the officer persists, do not argue or resist. Instead, document the interaction by continuing to record from a safe distance. If you feel your rights are being violated, you can file a complaint later or consult a lawyer. Remember, the law protects your right to record, but your safety comes first—always follow lawful orders to avoid escalation.

Recording inside your own home is generally allowed if you’re part of the conversation, but recording others without their consent could raise issues under Utah’s separate privacy statute, which bars installing or using a device to observe or record in a "private place" without consent. A home qualifies as a "private place" under the statute, so recording a conversation between others without their knowledge could violate the law. If you’re recording a conversation you’re part of, the one-party rule applies. Utah statutory text does not explicitly resolve how a homeowner’s own consent applies when secretly recording a guest or other third party inside the home without that third party’s knowledge, and no on-point Utah case law was found, so this nuance should be treated as medium/low confidence and flagged for attorney review if it becomes case-relevant.