Reviewed by Zachary Windham, Esq. – Admitted in Colorado, Florida, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington · Last reviewed Oct 8, 2026
Yes, generally. Colorado is commonly described as a one-party consent state because it permits a participant in a conversation to record it without obtaining the other participants’ permission. Different rules may apply when the recorder is not a participant, when a call involves another state, or when federal law or another legal duty applies. A lawful recording is not automatically admissible in court.
Can I record a conversation in Colorado?
Colorado uses separate statutes for calls and in-person conversations. C.R.S. § 18-9-303 addresses telephone and electronic communications, while C.R.S. § 18-9-304 addresses in-person eavesdropping.
- Phone calls and electronic communications: The wiretapping statute prohibits a person who is not a sender or intended receiver from knowingly recording without a sender’s or receiver’s consent, subject to statutory exceptions. A participant’s consent is therefore central to the rule.
- In-person conversations: The eavesdropping statute addresses someone who is “not visibly present” and records without at least one principal party’s consent. Visible presence is a separate statutory element, not the same thing as being a participant.
If you participate in a conversation, you do not need to announce that you are recording under these Colorado consent rules. Someone else may also record with a participant’s permission; permission is not limited to the person operating the device.
A recorder left behind after you leave a room presents a different question. Do not assume your earlier participation authorizes recording everyone else’s later conversation; consider who consented and whether that consent covers the recording.
When can recording without consent be illegal?
Secretly capturing another person’s protected conversation without participant consent can violate Colorado law. Knowingly using or disclosing information obtained through unlawful interception can also create liability.
Colorado courts assess privacy expectations under the circumstances. The possibility that nearby people might overhear a conversation does not necessarily eliminate a reasonable expectation against electronic interception.
Colorado also recognizes limited statutory exceptions, including use of devices on a person’s own premises for security or business purposes with reasonable public notice, certain news gathering, and authorized communications-provider or law-enforcement activity. These exceptions are affirmative defenses under Colorado law, not blanket permission to disregard federal law or other privacy obligations.
Separately, C.R.S. § 16-3-311 protects the right to lawfully record incidents involving police officers, but it does not permit interference with their lawful duties. The police-recording FAQ below explains the limits on seizure of recordings and devices.
Federal law permits interception by a participant or with a participant’s prior consent, but the consent exception does not cover interception for a criminal or tortious purpose. A useful personal or business reason to record does not itself resolve every legal issue.
What if someone on the call is in another state?
Do not assume Colorado law controls simply because you press record in Colorado. Another state’s stricter recording law may apply depending on the participants’ locations, the circumstances and the court deciding the dispute.
A California decision illustrates the risk. In Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., the California Supreme Court permitted California clients to pursue prospective injunctive relief concerning the Georgia office of a national brokerage firm’s undisclosed recording of calls with clients located in California. The decision applied California’s choice-of-law analysis; it did not decide Colorado law or establish a universal rule for every interstate call.
In List Interactive, Ltd. v. Knights of Columbus, a federal trial court in Colorado allowed a Connecticut recording-law counterclaim to proceed, rejecting the argument that federal one-party consent displaced that more protective state law. This was a ruling on federal preemption, not a final liability finding or a decision about which state’s law governs every interstate call.
For calls crossing state lines, obtaining everyone’s agreement before recording is the safer approach. Explain that recording will occur, obtain agreement, and address new participants before continuing. Our state-by-state recording-consent guide provides a general overview of state recording laws, but it does not determine which law applies to a particular call. Consult counsel about the laws of the relevant jurisdictions before relying on a one-party-consent rule or statutory exception.
What are the penalties for illegal recording in Colorado?
Under the current versions of § 18-9-303 and § 18-9-304, wiretapping and eavesdropping are each class 2 misdemeanors. The general maximum is 120 days in jail, a $750 fine, or both.
Older sources may describe wiretapping as a class 6 felony carrying substantially greater fines. For violations of § 18-9-303 committed on or after October 1, 2023, Colorado classifies wiretapping as a class 2 misdemeanor. Eavesdropping under § 18-9-304 has been a class 2 misdemeanor for offenses committed on or after March 1, 2022.
Those state classifications do not eliminate separate federal exposure. A federal Wiretap Act violation can carry up to five years in prison and a fine, subject to the statute’s exceptions.
For a qualifying federal violation, 18 U.S.C. § 2520 permits civil relief that can include damages, appropriate punitive damages, and reasonable attorney’s fees and litigation costs. These remedies are not automatic, and a Colorado-law violation does not by itself establish a federal claim.
Can a recording be used in a Colorado court?
A recording is not automatically admissible merely because it was lawfully made. Colorado authority recognizes that a recording made with one participant’s consent is not an unlawful interception for purposes of Colorado’s suppression statute. See People v. Morton, 539 P.2d 1255, 1258 (Colo. 1975). Ordinary authentication, completeness, relevance and hearsay requirements still apply.
Expect questions about who recorded the conversation, whose voices appear, whether the file is authentic and complete, and why the statements matter to the case. The purpose for offering a statement determines whether hearsay rules, an exclusion from hearsay, or an exception applies; lawful recording alone does not resolve that analysis.
An aggrieved person may seek suppression of an unlawfully intercepted communication or resulting evidence under C.R.S. § 16-15-102(10). The statute identifies grounds and procedures rather than declaring every disputed recording automatically excluded.
If you already have a recording, preserve the original file and surrounding messages. Before editing, circulating or relying on it in a dispute, ask counsel to assess both how it was obtained and how it could be used.
What should Colorado businesses check before recording?
Start with actual participant consent, not an assumption that owning the phone system makes the company a party to every call. Colorado’s consent rule should be applied to the employees, customers and recording tools actually involved.
A practical review covers which calls are captured, where participants are located, how recording is disclosed, who can access files and how long they are kept. Our call recording compliance guide addresses these operational questions in more detail.
Privacy compliance is a separate consideration. Depending on the business’s coverage and use of the recordings, customer-call data may implicate the Colorado Privacy Act. Although the Act’s general consumer framework excludes employment-context data, Colorado’s biometric provisions can reach certain employer practices. A system that creates voiceprints requires a different assessment from one that merely stores ordinary audio recordings.
For an ongoing recording program, align notices, employee instructions and vendor arrangements rather than reviewing each in isolation. This work can form part of outside general counsel support for Colorado businesses.
Frequently asked questions
Is Colorado a one-party or two-party consent state?
Colorado is a one-party consent state. One participant’s consent satisfies the state consent requirement; federal restrictions, statutory exceptions and interstate issues still need separate consideration.
Can I record someone in Colorado without their knowledge?
Yes, if you participate in the conversation and no other restriction applies. Recording other people’s protected conversations without a participant’s consent can violate Colorado law, subject to its exceptions; presence in the same building is not enough to assume permission.
Is wiretapping or eavesdropping a felony in Colorado?
The current Colorado statutes classify both wiretapping and eavesdropping as class 2 misdemeanors. Older conduct and separate state or federal offenses require their own analysis, so “illegal recording is never a felony” would be too broad.
Can I record police in Colorado?
Yes, Colorado protects lawful recording of incidents involving peace officers, without permitting interference with their duties. An officer generally may not seize a recording or recording device without consent, a search warrant or subpoena, or a lawful exception to the warrant requirement. Section 13-21-128 provides a separate civil remedy for specified unlawful interference, seizure or destruction, subject to its requirements.
Can I record a call from Colorado to California?
Do not rely on Colorado’s one-party rule alone. California’s more protective law may apply when a participant is located there. Obtaining every participant’s agreement before recording is the safer course; consult California-licensed counsel when the applicable law matters to a dispute or recording program.
Can Colorado businesses record customer calls?
Yes, with a participant’s consent under Colorado’s recording law, subject to other applicable restrictions. Owning the phone system does not automatically make the company a participant. Calls involving other states require separate review; our call recording compliance guide explains practical considerations for notices, access and retention.
Review your business recording practices
If your company records customer calls, meetings or employee communications, contact Omni Law P.C. to request a consultation concerning the program’s consent and compliance requirements. Do not send confidential or time-sensitive information. Contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship; representation begins only if Omni Law P.C. agrees in writing to undertake the matter.
Last reviewed: October 8, 2026.
Attorney Advertising. This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Reading this article or contacting Omni Law P.C. does not create an attorney-client relationship. Do not send confidential or time-sensitive information unless the firm has agreed in writing to represent you. Laws and their application change; obtain advice concerning your particular circumstances before acting.