This is a handy guideline to know whether the recording laws in each state are one party or two party consent. There is also a table at the end of this page with a simplified overview, or view each state’s page for a more in-depth analysis.
Call and Video Recording Laws By State
Hawaii, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Oregon, and Vermont all have special provisions so if you are interested in the laws related to those states it’s worthwhile to visit the state page to read the in-depth overview.
List of One Party Consent States
*RecordingLaw.com prefers to err on the side of caution with these states as they have special provisions. Make sure to read the state rules for your specific state.
Check your states individual recording laws by scrolling down for a short synopsis on the table, or click through to your state for a more in-depth overview.
Click here to see more information on One Party Consent States
Our recommended Digital Voice Recorder.
What does One Party Consent Mean?
One party consent means that an individual is able to record conversations that they are a part of without the other person (or persons) consent. You should still make sure to look at the individual laws for each state as there are a few small differences between them. A general rule for one party consent states is that if you are part of the conversation you are allowed to record it.
List of Two Party Consent States (All Party Consent)
- *Connecticut Recording Laws
- California Audio and Video Recording Laws
- Delaware Recording Laws
- Florida Recording Laws
- Illinois Recording Laws
- Maryland Recording Laws
- Massachusetts Recording Laws
- Michigan Recording Laws*
- Montana Recording Laws
- New Hampshire Recording Laws
- Oregon Recording Laws*
- Pennsylvania Recording Laws
- Washington Recording Laws
California, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan*, Missouri*, Montana* (Requires notification only), Nevada, New Hampshire, Oregon*. Pennsylvania, Vermont*, Washington, Illinois.
*RecordingLaw.com prefers to err on the side of caution with these states as they have special provisions. Make sure to read the state rules.
What is a Two Party Consent State? (All Party Consent)
In Two party (or all party) consent states it is required by state law that all parties that partake in a conversation must have given consent for that conversation to be recorded when there is an expectation of privacy. This law covers private as well as public places, if there is an expectation of privacy, consent must be given. Generally, video may be recorded in public places with the caveats that your video does not capture the audio or subject of the conversation, and the people are speaking in a public place. Check your states individual recording laws by scrolling down for a short synopsis on the table, or click through to your state for a more in-depth overview.
Click here to see more information on Two Party Consent States
| State | Simple Terms | Law |
|---|---|---|
| Federal | Federal law dictates that when no other law applies that it is a one party consent region. State laws will supercede this, so make sure to check your local state laws. | Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) & 18 U.S. Code § 2511 |
| Alabama | According to Ala. Code § 13A-11-30 you are not allowed to video record people in “A place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from casual or hostile intrusion or surveillance, but such term does not include a place to which the public or a substantial group of the public has access”. | Ala. Code § 13A-11-30 |
| Alaska | Alaska's highest court has specifically held that the eavesdropping statute is only in place to address 3rd party interceptions. They do have specific protections in place for nude photo and film. | Alaska Stat. Ann. § 42.20.330, § 42.20.310,§ 11.61.123 |
| Arizona | Consent is required to record conversations in which there is a legal expectation of privacy, though consent is not required in places where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy such as a street or park. One major caveat is that the owner of the telephone line may record phone calls without taking part of them (such as a business owner). | Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-3001, § 13-3012 |
| Arkansas | Ark. Code Ann. § 5-60-120 Consent is required to record conversations in which there is a legal expectation of privacy, though consent is not required in places where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy such as a street or park. | Ark. Code Ann. § 5-60-120 |
| California | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the communication. This means that in California you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement. However, one exception allows that if a conversation taking place in public, within government proceedings, or under conditions where one could be easily overheard is recorded, this cannot be punished under California’s eavesdropping statute. Cal. Penal Code § 632. California also has unique laws as it pertains to the entertainment industry and paparazzi. | |
| Colorado | In Colorado it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications whether it’s wire, oral or electronic without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. Albeit there is a caveat in that recording is allowed to take place if there is no reasonable expectation of privacy such as a public place such as a street or park. | Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-304 |
| Connecticut | Connecticut can be considered as both a one party state and two party state. This is because there are different laws for in-person conversations and telephone conversations. Read on for more information. | Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-187(a)(2), Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-570d(a) C.G.S.A. § 52-570d |
| Delaware | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of all parties taking part in the communication. This means that in Delaware you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement. Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1335(a)(4). Also, Delaware has a law that prohibits anyone from trespassing on private property to eavesdrop or carry out any other form of surveillance. Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1335(a)(1). | Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1335(a)(4), Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1335(a)(1), US v Vespe |
| District of Columbia | In D.C. it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications whether it’s wire, oral or electronic without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. Albeit there is a caveat in that recording is allowed to take place if there is no reasonable expectation of privacy such as a public place such as a street or park. | https://recordinglaw.com/united-states-recording-laws/one-party-consent-states/district-columbia-recording-laws/ |
| Florida | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the communication. Fla. Stat. § 934.03(2)(d). This means that in Florida you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement. | Fla. Stat. § 934.03(2)(d) |
| Georgia | In Georgia it is a criminal offense to use any device to record or disclose communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Georgia, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Ga. Code Ann. § 16-11-66(a). Georgia does have a caveat which allows for parents to legally intercept the communications of their children. | Ga. Code Ann. § 16-11-66, Ga. Code Ann. § 16-11-62 |
| Hawaii | Hawaii recording law stipulates that it is a one-party consent state. In Hawaii, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record or disclose communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Hawaii, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-42. | Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-42. |
| Idaho | Idaho recording law stipulates that it is a one-party consent state. In Idaho, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Idaho, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Idaho Code Ann. § 18-6702. | Idaho Code Ann. § 18-6702. |
| Illinois | In Illinois, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the communication. 720 Ill. Compiled Stat. 5/14-2(a)(1). This means that in Illinois you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement. Although the all-party consent stipulation does not apply to police officers who are performing their official duties, there are strict penalties in place for anyone caught recording police activities in public. 720 Ill. Compiled Stat. 5/14-3(g). In December of 2014 the statute was amended to allow the recording of conversations in areas where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. | 720 Ill. Compiled Stat. 5/14-2(a)(1), 720 Ill. Compiled Stat. 5/14-3(g), |
| Indiana | In Indiana, it is a criminal offense to use any device to intercept communications, whether wire or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. Ind. Code Ann. § 35-31.5-2-176. This applies to text messages and e-mails as well. Ind. Code Ann. § 35-31.5-2-110. | Ind. Code Ann. § 35-31.5-2-110, Ind. Code Ann. § 35-31.5-2-176. |
| Iowa | In Iowa, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication, as long as the recording is made without any criminal intent. Iowa Code Ann. § 808B.2. This means that in Iowa, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Iowa Code Ann. § 727.8. | Iowa Code Ann. § 808B.2, Iowa Code Ann. § 727.8. |
| Kansas | In Kansas, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record, listen to or amplify communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Kansas, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-6101(4). This state also has a hidden camera law which forbids the recording and disclosure of intercepted images. Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-6101(6). | Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-6101 |
| Kentucky | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, share or use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Kentucky, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.020. This state’s voyeurism laws also forbids the recording or disclosure of illegally obtained images. Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 531.090. | Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.020 ,Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.010. , Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 531.090 |
| Louisiana | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, use or share communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Louisiana, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 15:1303. This state also forbids the recording or sharing obtained illegally under its video voyeurism laws. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:283. | La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 15:1303. - Electric Surveillance Act, La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:283. |
| Maine | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, use or share communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication, unless the conversation is audible by normal, unaided hearing. This means that in Maine, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 15, § 710. This state’s privacy laws also forbid the recording or sharing of images obtained illegally. Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A, §511. | Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 15, § 710 , Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A, §511 |
| Maryland | Maryland’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act stipulates that it is a two-party consent state. In this state, it is a criminal offense to tape-record a conversation without the consent of all involved parties. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-402. | Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-402 |
| Massachusetts | Massachusetts recording law stipulates that it is a two-party consent state. In Massachusetts, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record and/or disseminate communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of all contributing parties. Mass. Ann. Laws ch. 272, § 99(C). | Mass. Ann. Laws ch. 272, § 99(B), Mass. Ann. Laws ch. 272, § 99(C) |
| Michigan | On the surface it appears that Michigan is an all party consent state, but previously a Michigan court has ruled that the definition of the word 'eavesdrop' inherently refers only to overhearing or recording private conversations (snooping) | Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539c, Sullivan v. Gray (1982) |
| Michigan* | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, use or share communications, whether they're wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of all contributing parties. This means that in Michigan you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539c . *The Michigan Court of appeals has precedent interpreting the wiretapping statue as only applying to a third party interception of a conversation. In Michigan if you are taking part in a conversation, you are allowed to record the conversation. This is due to an interpretation of the word eavesdrop by the Michigan Court of Appeals, so while the law is written as an 'All Party Consent' law, the interpretation of it in Michigan is that the term 'eavesdrop' only applies to outside third parties listening in. | 117 Mich. App. 476 (1982), Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539c |
| Minnesota | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, share or use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Minnesota, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intent. Minn. Stat. § 626A.02. This state’s hidden camera laws also forbid the recording or sharing of illegally obtained images. Minn. Stat. § 609.746. Minn. Stat. § 626A.02 , Minn. Stat. § 609.746. | Minn. Stat. § 626A.02, Minn. Stat. § 609.746 |
| Mississippi | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, share or use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Mississippi, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. Miss. Code Ann. § 41-29-531(e). This state’s hidden camera law forbids the recording or sharing of illegally obtained images. Miss. Code Ann. § 97-29-63. | Miss. Code Ann. § 41-29-531, Miss. Code Ann. § 97-29-63 |
| Missouri | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share communications, whether they’re wire or oral, without the consent of at least one contributing party. This means that in Missouri you are not legally allowed to record a wire or oral conversation you are taking part in unless you have the consent of at least one party. t is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share communications, whether they’re wire or oral, without the consent of at least one contributing party. This means that in Missouri you are not legally allowed to record a wire or oral conversation you are taking part in unless you have the consent of at least one party. This state does stipulate that electronic communications can be lawfully recorded or shared with the consent of at least one party, barring any criminal intentions. This applies to conversations where all contributing parties are using a cell phone, including text messages sent between cell phones. However, a Missouri appellate court determined that a conversation taking place where one party is using a cell phone and the other is using a regular wire phone is indeed protected under the wiretap law. Lee v. Lee, 967 S.W.2d 82 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). | Mo. Ann. Stat. § 542.402(2)(3), Lee v. Lee, 967 S.W.2d 82 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). |
| Montana | Montana recording law stipulates that it is a two-party consent state, excluding some specific situations. In Montana, it is generally a criminal offense to use a hidden device to record oral or electronic communications without the consent of all contributing parties. Mont. Code Ann. § 45-8-213 (2011). This means that in Montana you are not legally allowed to secretly record a conversation unless all parties are in agreement, but in some situations recordings can be made without consent as long as this is not done covertly. This means that although consent is not required, all parties must be notified that the conversation is being recorded. | Mont. Code Ann. § 45-8-213 (2011) |
| Nebraska | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Nebraska, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. It is also lawful to record electronic communications that are easily available to the public. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-290 (2011). | Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-290 (2011), Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-283, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-286. |
| Nevada* | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, share or use oral conversations without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. However, the recording or sharing of wire conversations require the consent of all involved parties. This means that in Nevada, you are legally allowed to record an oral conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, but you need the consent of everyone involved to record wire communications. Wired communication refers to the transmission of data, so even if it's a wireless device such as a cellphone it is still considered to be wired communication. Examples of wired communications are cell phones, land lines, zoom calls, and VOIP. | Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 200.620, 200.650 (2011), Lane V. Allstate |
| New Hampshire | New Hampshire recording law stipulates that it is a two-party consent state. In New Hampshire, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the conversation. This means that in New Hampshire you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement. However, the offense is considered a misdemeanor instead of a felony if the perpetrator contributed to the communication in question or received the prior consent of one party to the recording. N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 570-A:2 (2012). | N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 570-A:2 (2012). |
| New Jersey | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share communications, whether they are oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in New Jersey, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. It is also lawful to record electronic communications that are easily available to the public. N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:156A-4 (West 2012). | N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:156A-4 (West 2012), N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:156A-2 |
| New Mexico | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, share or use wire communications without the consent of at least one person taking part in the conversation. This means that in New Mexico, you are legally allowed to record a wire conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. This state does not require consent to record oral communication. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-12-1 (West 2012). New Mexico law states that journalists do not require consent to record electronic communications. This applies to conversations where all contributing parties are using a cell phone or other wireless devices, including text messages sent between cell phones. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-12-1. | N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-12-1 |
| New York | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record, obtain, share or use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in New York, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. N.Y. Penal Law §§ 250.00, 250.05 (McKinney 2012). | N.Y. Penal Law §§ 250.00, 250.05 (McKinney 2012). |
| North Carolina | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in North Carolina, you are legally allowed to record a conversation with prior consent from one of the involved parties. N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 15A-287 (West 2012). A North Carolina appellate court determined that implied consent to a recording is established once a party is told they are being recorded and remains a part of the conversation regardless. North Carolina v. Price, 611 S.E.2d 891 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005). | N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 15A-287, North Carolina v. Price, 611 S.E.2d 891 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005). |
| North Dakota | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in North Dakota, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-02 (2011). However, while the consent of one party is required to record a telephone conversation, this only applies to conversations that take place entirely or partially through “wire, cable, or other like connection between the point of origin and the point of reception”. Therefore, conversations where all parties are using a cell phone, as well as messages exchanged between cell phones, can be lawfully intercepted. N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-04. | N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-02, N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-15-04. |
| Ohio | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Ohio, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2933.52 (West 2012). | Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2933.52 (West 2012), Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2933.51. |
| Oklahoma | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Oklahoma, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 176.4 (West 2012). | Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 176.4 (West 2012), Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 176.4 , Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 1202. |
| Oregon | Oregon Law is mixed. For in person oral recordings it is required to have consent from all parties, whereas for digital communications it is effectively a one party consent state where you are only required to have the consent of one party. | Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 165.535, 165.540, |
| Pennsylvania | Pennsylvania recording law stipulates that it is a two-party consent state. In Pennsylvania, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the conversation. This means that in Pennsylvania you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5704 (West 2012). | 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5704 |
| Rhode Island | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Rhode Island, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. It is also lawful to share the details of a conversation that has become widely circulated or available to the public. R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21 (2012). | R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-35-21 (2012), R.I. Gen. Laws § 12-5.1-1 |
| South Carolina | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in South Carolina, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. S.C. Code Ann. § 17-30-30 (2011). | S.C. Code Ann. § 17-30-30 (2011), S.C. Code Ann. § 17-30-15 |
| South Dakota | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in South Dakota, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-35A-20 (2012). | S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-35A-20 (2012) & S.D. Codified Laws § 23A-35A-1 (2012) |
| Tennessee | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Tennessee, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. It is also lawful to record electronic communications that are easily available to the public. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-601 (West 2012). | Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-601 & Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-604 & Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-6-303 (West 2012) |
| Texas | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Texas, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. It is also lawful to record electronic communications that are easily available to the public. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 16.02 (Vernon 2011). | Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 16.02 (Vernon 2011) & Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 18.20 |
| Utah | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Utah, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. It is also lawful to record electronic communications easily available to the public. | Utah Code Ann. § 77-23a-3 & Utah Code Ann. § 77-23a-4 |
| Vermont* | Vermont law does not contain any provisions regarding the legality of recording or sharing any kind of audio-based conversations. This means that Vermont is considered a one-party consent state. However, the state Supreme Court has determined that it is a criminal offense to covertly and electronically monitor communications occurring in an person’s home. Vermont v. Geraw, 795 A.2d 1219 (Vt. 2002). A state high court upheld that an individual should not be under the expectation of privacy in a hospital’s emergency treatment section as any number of different people are frequently coming and going. Vermont v. Rheaume, 889 A.2d 711 (Vt. 2005). It is also considered lawful to record a conversation taking place in a parking lot for the same reason. Vermont v. Brooks, 601 A.2d 963 (Vt. 1991). | Vermont v. Geraw, 795 A.2d 1219 (Vt. 2002) & Vermont v. Rheaume, 889 A.2d 711 (Vt. 2005) & Vermont v. Brooks, 601 A.2d 963 (Vt. 1991). |
| Virginia | In Virginia, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Virginia, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties. Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-62 (West 2012). | Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-61 & Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-62 (West 2012). |
| Washington | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the conversation. | Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9.73.030 (West 2012). |
| West Virginia | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in West Virginia, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. W. Va. Code § 62-1D-3 (2012). | W. Va. Code § 62-1D-3 |
| Wisconsin | In Wisconsin, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Wisconsin, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. Wis. Stat. Ann. § 968.31 (West 2011). Evidence that is obtained by recording communication is 'totally' inadmissable in civil court cases. Regardless of who took the recording, the only way a recording can be admissable in a civil case is with the consent of the person recorded. | Wis. Stat. Ann. § 968.27 (West 2011) & Wis. Stat. Ann. § 968.31 (West 2011) & Wis. Stat. Ann. § 885.365(1 |
| Wyoming | It is a criminal offense to use any device to record or share use communications, whether they are wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of at least one person taking part in the communication. This means that in Wyoming, you are legally allowed to record a conversation if you are a contributor, or with prior consent from one of the involved parties, barring any criminal intentions. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-3-702 (2012). | Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-3-702 |
Note that Oregon’s law (ORS 165.54) prohibiting recording of face-to-face conversations without notice (consent was not part of the law) to all parties involved was found unconstitutional by the Oregon Court of Appeals. So Oregon is now a pure one-party consent state — you can record phone calls that you are a party to without consent or notice to the other party.
Correction: the decision voiding the law against obtaining (recording) conversations without notice to all parties was by the Ninth Circuit US Court of Appeals, not the Oregon Court of Appeal.