Is it legal to record phone calls in Colorado?
Yes, generally. Colorado is a one-party consent state: you may record a phone call you take part in without telling the other person, because your own consent satisfies the rule. Recording calls you are not part of is illegal. When the other person may be in an all-party consent state like California or Florida, disclose the recording anyway.
What Colorado law says
Colorado follows one-party consent for phone calls, consistent with the federal Wiretap Act: as long as one participant — and you count — consents, the recording is lawful. The rule covers conversations you participate in; intercepting other people’s calls remains a crime. Bear in mind the rule protects you within Colorado — interstate calls can implicate stricter states’ laws, which is why professionals default to disclosure.
Colorado is a one-party consent state: Colorado prohibits recording or intercepting a telephone or electronic communication only when the recorder is neither the sender nor the receiver and lacks the consent of at least one party (§ 18-9-303, wiretapping). A companion statute (§ 18-9-304, eavesdropping) bans recording in-person conversations by someone not visibly present without the consent of at least one principal party. Recording your own phone calls is legal in Colorado; secretly tapping other people's calls is a crime.
"A person not a sender or receiver who intercepts a wire, electronic, or oral communication without the consent of at least one sender or receiver commits wiretapping." — Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-303(1) (senders and receivers — including a participant recording their own call — are outside the prohibition)
Federal one-party consent under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) matches Colorado's rule for calls you participate in. Colorado still separately bans non-participant eavesdropping under § 18-9-304 and imposes state criminal penalties that federal law does not displace.
Colorado is a one-party consent state for both phone calls and in-person conversations. If you are the sender or receiver of a call, the wiretapping statute simply does not reach you — no announcement, beep tone, or permission from the other caller is required. Consent from any one sender or receiver also legalizes recording by a third party, which is why police informants can lawfully wear a wire. Consent does not need to be in writing; participating in the call after agreeing to be recorded, or simply being the consenting participant yourself, suffices. For in-person conversations, the eavesdropping statute only applies to people not visibly present, and Colorado courts additionally look at whether the speakers had a reasonable expectation of privacy — a hidden microphone in a restroom violated the statute in People v. Lesslie even though passersby could theoretically have overheard.
| Consent rule for phone calls | One-party consent |
| Recording calls you're part of | Allowed — your own consent is sufficient. |
| Calls with people in other states | The stricter state's rule may apply — when in doubt, disclose. |
What breaking the law costs in Colorado
Wiretapping under § 18-9-303 and eavesdropping under § 18-9-304 are each a class 2 misdemeanor, punishable by up to 120 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $750. Both offenses were felonies before Colorado's misdemeanor reform bill (SB21-271) reclassified them effective March 1, 2022, so older articles describing a class 6 felony are out of date.
Colorado's wiretap and eavesdropping statutes do not create their own statutory-damages lawsuit for recorded calls. A person recorded in violation of the statutes may pursue common-law invasion-of-privacy claims, and a separate statute (§ 13-21-128) creates civil liability when police interfere with a person lawfully recording them. Recordings made with one-party consent are not suppressed as evidence (People v. Morton).
Exceptions worth knowing
- The sender or receiver of a call may record it, and anyone may record with the prior consent of at least one sender or receiver (one-party consent)
- In-person conversations may be recorded by anyone visibly present or with the consent of one principal party (§ 18-9-304)
- Law enforcement may intercept communications under a court order issued under Colorado's wiretap procedures (§ 16-15-102)
- Colorado expressly protects a citizen's right to record police officers performing their duties in public (§ 16-3-311)
How Colorado courts have ruled
Statutes set the rule; cases show how it plays out when a recording ends up in front of a judge. These are real, decided cases under Colorado law.
What happened: A private investigator recorded his own conversations with the defendants without their knowledge, and the defendants argued the recordings were illegal interceptions that had to be suppressed.
The ruling: The Colorado Supreme Court held that the wiretapping and eavesdropping statutes do not prohibit recording when one party to the conversation consents, so there was no unlawful interception and no basis for suppression.
What happened: A Hinsdale County deputy sheriff helped plant a hidden listening device on the windowsill of a bar's men's restroom to catch drug talk, monitoring conversations from a nearby motel without any warrant or participant's consent.
The ruling: The court affirmed his conviction for conspiracy to commit eavesdropping, holding that restroom occupants had a reasonable expectation of privacy that a hidden transmitter could not defeat — even though someone could theoretically have overheard them by chance.
What happened: Prosecutors sought to use recorded jail phone calls against a defendant; the defense argued the inmate had not consented to monitoring.
The ruling: The court held that advance notice that jail calls are recorded — through orientation and posted warnings — constitutes implied consent, making the recordings lawful under Colorado's wiretapping statutes.
Personal calls vs. business calls in Colorado
Recording personal calls
If you live in Colorado, you can record your own phone calls — with an ex, a landlord, a contractor, or anyone else — without telling the other person, because your own participation supplies the required consent. People commonly do this to document harassment, threats, or verbal agreements, and under People v. Morton such recordings are admissible in court under normal evidence rules. What you cannot do is record calls you are not on: putting a recorder on your spouse's phone line or bugging a room to capture other people's conversations is criminal wiretapping or eavesdropping, even inside your own home, as the hidden-microphone conviction in People v. Lesslie shows. In custody and divorce cases, judges also weigh how a recording was obtained, so secretly intercepted material can hurt more than help.
Recording business calls
Colorado businesses may record customer calls with only their own side's consent — the employee on the line is a party, so no beep or announcement is required by Colorado law. Employer monitoring of business calls is likewise lawful when the company or a participating employee consents, but covertly tapping employees' personal calls that no participant has consented to is a misdemeanor offense. Most companies still announce recording at the start of calls because it is standard industry practice and because an announcement creates clean implied consent from everyone on the line. That announcement matters most for interstate calling: a Colorado call center dialing into all-party-consent states like California or Florida is exposed to those states' stricter laws, so compliance teams should apply the strictest applicable rule.
Calls that cross state lines
Colorado appellate courts have not established a leading choice-of-law rule for calls that cross state lines. Colorado's one-party rule protects recording done in Colorado, but courts in stricter states — most prominently California in Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney — have applied their own all-party-consent laws to calls made into their states. Anyone in Colorado who regularly records calls with out-of-state parties should follow the strictest state's rule or announce the recording at the start of the call.
The safe way to record in Colorado
Whatever the local rule, one habit covers every situation: say the call is being recorded at the start. Consent is then on the recording itself, and cross-border calls stop being a legal puzzle. Callmark can play "This call may be recorded" automatically on your calls, so the disclosure never depends on your memory.
For the full national picture — every all-party state, cross-border rules, and consent mechanics — see our state-by-state consent guide.
Sources and further reading
Statutes, court opinions, and reference guides cited on this page. Laws change — verify current text before relying on it for anything consequential.
- C.R.S. § 18-9-303 — Wiretapping prohibited (Colorado.Public.Law, current through 2025)
- C.R.S. § 18-9-304 — Eavesdropping prohibited (Colorado.Public.Law)
- People v. Morton, 189 Colo. 198, 539 P.2d 1255 (1975) (Justia)
- People v. Lesslie, 939 P.2d 443 (Colo. App. 1996) (Justia)
- SB21-271 Misdemeanor Reform (Colorado General Assembly)
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press — Colorado recording guide
- Colorado Legal Defense Group — Colorado wiretapping and eavesdropping laws
Common questions
Yes. As a participant in the call, your consent satisfies Colorado’s one-party rule. Disclosure is still wise whenever the other party might be in an all-party consent state.
Courts have applied different states' laws to interstate calls, and you often can't verify where a mobile number is. The practical rule: assume the strictest state applies and disclose the recording.
In most states, continuing a call after a clear "this call may be recorded" announcement is treated as implied consent — the same mechanism customer-service lines rely on.
No. Colorado is a one-party consent state, and as a participant in the call your own consent is enough under § 18-9-303. The requirement to notify everyone only comes into play when the other caller is in an all-party-consent state, where that state's law may apply.
You can lawfully record calls you are on with your ex, and Colorado courts admit one-party-consent recordings under People v. Morton. Recording calls between your ex and your child when you are not on the line is different — you are not a party, and Colorado has no clear parental vicarious-consent doctrine, so that recording could itself be a crime.
Not anymore. Wiretapping and eavesdropping were reclassified from felonies to class 2 misdemeanors effective March 1, 2022, carrying up to 120 days in jail and a $750 fine. It is still a crime — just a lower-level one than many older articles state.
Yes, when the company is a party to the call or a participating employee consents — routine call-center recording and supervisor monitoring of business calls is legal without notifying the customer under Colorado law. Secretly intercepting an employee's private calls that no participant consented to would violate the wiretapping statute.
Yes. Colorado statute § 16-3-311 expressly protects the right to record peace officers performing their duties, and § 13-21-128 gives you a civil claim if an officer destroys or interferes with your recording.
Record responsibly in Colorado, automatically.
Built-in disclosure · automatic transcripts and summaries · 200 minutes included
Get Callmark