Recording Law for Recording in Public in Utah

Under Utah law, you can legally record any conversation you are part of without telling the other person. This is because Utah is a one-party consent state. The rule comes from Utah Code § 77-23a-4(7)(b), which says a person can intercept a communication if they are a party to it or have prior consent from a party—unless the recording is done to commit a crime or a tort. The statute applies to wire, electronic, and oral communications once the statutory coverage threshold is met. For in-person utterances, the coverage threshold includes a reasonable-expectation-of-privacy element: the speaker must exhibit an expectation that the communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying that expectation (§ 77-23a-3(13)). For phone calls and electronic messages, no such expectation-of-privacy element applies, so the one-party consent rule governs coverage directly. The only exception is if the conversation is not protected by the law in the first place, which happens when the speaker doesn’t have a reasonable expectation that it won’t be recorded under the applicable statutory gate.

Recording an on-duty police officer performing official duties in plain view is protected in Utah. Utah Code § 76-8-305(4) states that recording a peace officer with a camera or phone while they are on duty in plain view does not, by itself, count as interference, resisting, disorderly conduct, or obstruction of justice. Utah falls within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which has held that the First Amendment protects the right to record police officers performing their official duties in public. In Irizarry v. Yehia, the Tenth Circuit ruled that this right was clearly established and denied the defendant officer qualified immunity. This means you can record police interactions in public places without fear of being charged for doing so, as long as you don’t interfere with their work.

Silent video recording in public is not restricted by Utah’s wiretap laws. The wiretap statute only covers the interception of audio or the content of communications, so recording video without sound is allowed. However, if you add audio to the video, the one-party consent rule applies. There’s also a separate law, Utah Code § 76-12-302, that makes it a Class B misdemeanor to use a device to observe or record someone in a private place without their consent. But this law only applies to private places, not public ones. For example, recording a conversation in a public park is fine, but recording inside someone’s home without consent could be illegal. The privacy-violation statute independently criminalizes installing or using a device to observe or record in a 'private place' as defined by § 76-12-301(2), regardless of whether audio is captured.

Utah’s wiretap law does not define “public place” because it doesn’t need to. The one-party consent rule applies to covered communications regardless of location. However, the law does protect in-person utterances where the speaker has a reasonable expectation of privacy, even in a public setting. The law protects an in-person utterance only if the speaker exhibited an expectation that the communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying that expectation (§ 77-23a-3(13)). This means you can’t assume that every conversation in a store or restaurant is fair game just because it’s open to the public. For phone calls and electronic messages, no such expectation-of-privacy element applies, so the one-party consent rule governs coverage directly regardless of setting.

Imagine you’re at a public park and two people near you start arguing. One of them is speaking in a normal voice, but the other lowers their voice and steps behind a tree to talk privately. You want to record the conversation to document what happens. Under Utah law, the quieter part of the conversation may be protected as an 'oral communication' under § 77-23a-3(13) if the speaker exhibited an expectation that the communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying that expectation. Recording that part could run into legal trouble because the speaker might have a valid expectation that the conversation wouldn’t be overheard. This is a gray area, so it’s best to be cautious and avoid recording parts of a conversation where someone seems to be seeking privacy.

Breaking Utah’s recording laws can lead to serious consequences. Violating the wiretap statute, Utah Code § 77-23a-4, is a third-degree felony, though certain radio-communication violations are downgraded to class A or class B misdemeanors depending on the circumstances. The separate privacy violation law, Utah Code § 76-12-302, makes it a Class B misdemeanor to record someone in a private place without consent. There’s also a civil penalty under Utah Code § 77-23a-11, which allows the person being recorded to sue for damages. If you’re unsure whether recording is legal in a specific situation, it’s safest to ask for consent or avoid recording altogether.