Utah Code » Title 77, Chapter 7a — Law Enforcement Use of Body-worn Cameras
Utah Code

Utah Code § 77-7a-104 (2026)

Activation and use of body-worn cameras

✓ laws through the 2026 General Session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1/1/2027

As used in this section:
"Health care facility" means the same as that term is defined in Section 78B-3-403.
"Health care provider" means the same as that term is defined in Section 78B-3-403.
"Hospital" means the same as that term is defined in Section 78B-3-403.
"Human service program" means the same as that term is defined in Section 26B-2-101.
Except as provided in Subsection (5), an officer using a body-worn camera:
shall verify that the equipment is properly functioning as is reasonably within the officer's ability;
shall report any malfunctioning equipment to the officer's supervisor if:
the body-worn camera issued to the officer is not functioning properly upon initial inspection; or
the officer determines that the officer's body-worn camera is not functioning properly at any time while the officer is on duty;
shall wear the body-worn camera so that it is clearly visible to the individual being recorded;
shall activate the body-worn camera prior to any law enforcement encounter, or as soon as reasonably possible;
shall record in an uninterrupted manner until after the conclusion of a law enforcement encounter, except as an interruption of a recording is allowed under this section;
shall, when going on duty and off duty, record the officer's name, identification number, and the current time and date, unless the information is already available due to the functionality of the body-worn camera;
shall, if the body-worn camera was present during a law enforcement encounter, document the presence of the body-worn camera in any report or other official record of a contact;
except as provided in Subsection (2)(i), when the body-worn camera has been activated during the officer's direct participation in a law enforcement encounter, keep the body-worn camera activated until the officer's direct participation in the law enforcement encounter is complete;
may deactivate the body-worn camera:
to consult with a supervisor or another officer;
during a significant period of inactivity;
during a conversation with a sensitive victim of crime, a witness of a crime, or an individual who wishes to report or discuss criminal activity if:
the individual who is the subject of the recording requests that the officer deactivate the officer's body-worn camera; and
the officer believes that the value of the information outweighs the value of the potential recording and records the request by the individual to deactivate the body-worn camera; or
during a conversation with a victim of a domestic violence offense as defined in Section 77-36-1, or a sexual offense, as described in Title 76, Chapter 5, Part 4, Sexual Offenses, if:
the officer is conducting an evidence-based lethality assessment;
the victim or the officer believes that deactivating the body-worn camera recording will encourage complete and accurate information sharing by the victim, or is necessary to protect the safety or identity of the victim; and
the officer's body-worn camera is reactivated as soon as reasonably possible after the evidence-based lethality assessment is complete;
shall, if the officer deactivates or fails to activate the body-worn camera in violation of this section, document in a written report the reason for deactivating or for failing to activate the body-worn camera; and
may not activate a body-worn camera in a hospital, health care facility, human service program, or the clinic of a health care provider, except during a law enforcement encounter, and with notice under Section 77-7a-105.
A violation of this section may not serve as the sole basis to dismiss a criminal case or charge.
This section does not preclude a law enforcement agency from establishing internal agency policies for an officer's failure to comply with the requirements of this section.
Subsections (2)(c), (d), (e), (g), (h), and (j) do not apply to an officer who:
is assigned to a narcotics unit or task force that is engaged primarily in narcotics investigations; or
is engaged in an undercover operation.

Amended by Chapter 445, 2026 General Session

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2022–2023 · leading case: State v. Alvarado, 2023 UT App 123, 538 P.3d 633.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Alvarado, 2023 UT App 123, 538 P.3d 633. · cites it 20× “At that time, however, the legislature provided no direction should a law enforcement officer not comply with section 77-7a-104. Then in 2020, the legislature enacted Utah Code section 77-7a-104.”
State v. Jessop, 2023 UT App 140, 540 P.3d 713. · cites it 7× “§ 77-7a-104(12) (emphasis added). Thus, while we do not reach the statutory question here, we think it unlikely that Jessop would have prevailed on appeal had he sought relief on the theory that the detectives violated the body-worn camera statute, given the “sole basis”…”
Myers v. St. George Police Dep't, No. 4:20-cv-00113 (D. Utah Mar. 11, 2022). · cites it 6× “§ 77-7a-104(1). 17 Id. § 77-7a-104(4). 18 Id.”
Utah Code § 77-7a-104(1): 1 case
Myers v. St. George Police Dep't, No. 4:20-cv-00113 (D. Utah Mar. 11, 2022). “§ 77-7a-104(1). 17 Id. § 77-7a-104(4). 18 Id.”
Utah Code § 77-7a-104(10): 1 case
Myers v. St. George Police Dep't, No. 4:20-cv-00113 (D. Utah Mar. 11, 2022). “§ 77-7a-104(1). 17 Id. § 77-7a-104(4). 18 Id.”
Utah Code § 77-7a-104(12): 2 cases
State v. Jessop, 2023 UT App 140, 540 P.3d 713. “§ 77-7a-104(12) (emphasis added). Thus, while we do not reach the statutory question here, we think it unlikely that Jessop would have prevailed on appeal had he sought relief on the theory that the detectives violated the body-worn camera statute, given the “sole basis”…”
Myers v. St. George Police Dep't, No. 4:20-cv-00113 (D. Utah Mar. 11, 2022). “§ 77-7a-104(1). 17 Id. § 77-7a-104(4). 18 Id.”
Utah Code § 77-7a-104(4): 3 cases
State v. Jessop, 2023 UT App 140, 540 P.3d 713. “§ 77-7a-104(12) (emphasis added). Thus, while we do not reach the statutory question here, we think it unlikely that Jessop would have prevailed on appeal had he sought relief on the theory that the detectives violated the body-worn camera statute, given the “sole basis”…”
State v. Alvarado, 2023 UT App 123, 538 P.3d 633. “At that time, however, the legislature provided no direction should a law enforcement officer not comply with section 77-7a-104. Then in 2020, the legislature enacted Utah Code section 77-7a-104.”
Myers v. St. George Police Dep't, No. 4:20-cv-00113 (D. Utah Mar. 11, 2022). “§ 77-7a-104(1). 17 Id. § 77-7a-104(4). 18 Id.”
Utah Code § 77-7a-104(5): 1 case
Myers v. St. George Police Dep't, No. 4:20-cv-00113 (D. Utah Mar. 11, 2022). “§ 77-7a-104(1). 17 Id. § 77-7a-104(4). 18 Id.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.