In Arizona, surreptitious recording or viewing generally refers to secretly capturing images, video, or audio of another person without their knowledge or consent, particularly in situations where that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. This offense is addressed under A.R.S. § 13-3019, which is designed to protect individuals from invasive or voyeuristic acts.
To be charged with surreptitious recording or viewing in Arizona, the prosecution typically must prove:
In Arizona, surreptitious recording and voyeurism are related but distinct sex crimes under state law.
Surreptitious recording generally involves secretly capturing someone’s conversations or activities—often through audio, video, or photography—without their consent, in situations where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This can include private rooms, restrooms, or changing areas. The key element is the act of recording without permission.
Voyeurism focuses on intentionally viewing, photographing, or filming a person without consent when that person is in a state of undress or engaging in sexual activity, again in a place where privacy is expected. Voyeurism emphasizes the sexual or prurient intent behind the act.
The main difference is intent and context: surreptitious recording can cover a broad range of secret recordings, while voyeurism specifically targets invasive, often sexualized observation. Both are criminal offenses in Arizona and can carry serious penalties, including jail time, fines, and mandatory registration in some cases.
Surreptitious recording or distribution under A.R.S. 13-3019 is generally a class 5 felony. As with the case of voyeurism, if the person depicted in the published or distributed photo or recording is recognizable, it is a class 4 felony. Similarly, the presumptive sentence (with no aggravating factors, such as a prior conviction for the same conduct) would be between 1.5 and 2.5 years in prison. But unlike the voyeurism law, surreptitious recording is a class 6 felony if all that is involved is viewing the person in question without a device, whether it be a camera, videotape, or digital recording mechanism.
While this difference between voyeurism and surreptitious recording – the presence or absence of sexual stimulation as the purpose of the act – may not change the jail or prison time for a defendant convicted of one of these crimes, it may make a difference when it comes to registration as a sex offender.
Recording, filming, distributing, or duplicating any visual depiction of a minor engaged in sexual conduct (A.R.S. 13-3553) is a separate offense from surreptitious recording. This is a class 2 felony, and where the minor is under 5, it is a Dangerous Crime Against Children, bringing even more severe penalties.
Although a conviction for surreptitious recording does not, under the language of the sex offender registration law, require registration as a sex offender, the judge may exercise the discretion to order registration by anyone convicted of any offense where the finding is that the crime was sexually motivated. So the quick answer to the question whether you will have to register as a sex offender if convicted of surreptitious recording is that it depends. Specifically, it hinges on whether (a) the conviction includes a finding that the offense was sexually motivated and (b) if so, the judge exercises his or her discretion to order registration.
In practice, however, this distinction is largely academic. If there is a charge that there has been a secret (non-consensual) recording, and if the recording was sexually motivated, the charge against you will likely be voyeurism, and not surreptitious recording. In either event, the chances are that a conviction will bring the same penalty, including the possibility, in the judge’s discretion, of sex offender registration.
Surreptitious recording cases in Arizona are taken seriously because they involve privacy rights and sensitive personal situations. Under ars 13-3019 the state must prove specific elements related to intent, consent, and reasonable expectations of privacy. At Feldman & Royle, our surreptitious recording lawyer understands how prosecutors build these cases and how to challenge weaknesses in their claims. Below are the key defenses that may be available depending on the circumstances of your case.
One of the most fundamental defenses to charges under ARS 13-3019 is showing that the alleged recording occurred in a place where the person did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. If the conduct occurred in a public area or in a location where privacy is not reasonably expected, then the essential element of unlawful recording may not be met. An experienced Phoenix surreptitious recording attorney will carefully review the circumstances to determine whether privacy expectations were present.
Consent by the person recorded can be a complete defense. If the individual recorded or viewed another person with that person’s clear consent, then the state will not be able to prove that the act was unauthorized. This defense often requires documentation or testimony that consent was freely and knowingly given, and a surreptitious recording defense lawyer in Arizona will work to gather evidence supporting that position.
ARS 13-3019 includes specific exemptions where recordings are not unlawful, such as for security purposes when notice is clearly posted in areas where privacy is expected or when law enforcement officers make recordings in the course of a lawful investigation. For example, if the recording was part of a legitimate security protocol at a business that posted clear signage, the activity may fall within an exemption. An Arizona surreptitious recording attorney can assess whether your situation fits these statutory exemptions.
In many cases, the defense will look beyond the statutory elements and challenge how evidence was obtained. Violations of constitutional rights, such as unlawful search or seizure, may lead to suppression of key evidence. A surreptitious recording attorney will examine whether law enforcement followed proper procedures when investigating and collecting recordings or digital devices. If rights were violated, the evidence may be excluded, weakening the prosecution’s case.
Because ARS 13-3019 requires the act to be knowing, showing that a person lacked intent to secretly record or view another can support a defense. Cases involving accidental recordings or misunderstandings about whether consent was given may benefit from this defense. An experienced surreptitious recording defense lawyer in Arizona will evaluate your actions and evidence to determine whether intent can be reasonably disputed.
At Feldman & Royle, we understand how serious surreptitious recording charges can be for individuals in Phoenix and throughout Arizona. If you are facing allegations under ars 13-3019, it is essential to speak with a trusted Phoenix surreptitious recording attorney who can evaluate your case and protect your rights. Our team has extensive experience as a surreptitious recording defense lawyer in Arizona and works diligently to challenge evidence and explore every possible defense strategy. As a dedicated Arizona surreptitious recording attorney and Phoenix criminal defense attorney, we provide knowledgeable guidance and a thorough understanding of the legal standards that apply to these cases. We also offer a free consultation for Arizona surreptitious recording charges so you can discuss your situation with an experienced lawyer and learn how we may be able to help before moving forward with any decisions. With focused advocacy and personalized attention, our firm strives to secure the best possible outcomes for clients confronting hidden recording allegations.
Facing surreptitious recording charges in Arizona can feel overwhelming. The legal system moves fast, and the consequences, both criminal and personal, can be severe. When your privacy, reputation, and freedom are on the line, experience, insight, and strategy matter more than ever.
At Feldman & Royle, we specialize in navigating complex criminal cases, including surreptitious recording charges, with a careful balance of aggressive defense and strategic negotiation. Here’s why clients across Arizona trust us when it matters most:
Understanding how the state builds its case is critical. Some law firms can only react to charges, but our team has been on the other side of the courtroom. Having former prosecutors defending you means we anticipate the prosecution’s strategy before it happens and craft countermeasures to protect your rights.
From the moment you reach out, we are already building your defense. Our goal is to explore every possible avenue to reduce or dismiss charges, but we never approach negotiations without fully preparing for trial. That means whether your case resolves before trial or goes to the courtroom, you have a team ready to fight for you every step of the way.
Surreptitious recording cases often hinge on technical details: devices, recordings, and digital evidence. We meticulously review every piece of evidence, examining metadata, chain of custody, and any legal errors in how the evidence was obtained. This attention to detail can uncover weaknesses that significantly strengthen your defense.
Every client’s situation is unique, and discretion is paramount. At Feldman & Royle, we provide personalized attention tailored to your case, ensuring your privacy is protected and your defense strategy aligns with your goals. You’re not just another case file; you are a person who deserves a strategic, compassionate, and proactive legal team.
Our clients choose Feldman & Royle because we combine experience with results. Whether it’s negotiating favorable pretrial resolutions, challenging evidence, or defending you vigorously at trial, our team has successfully helped individuals facing surreptitious recording charges across the state.
You don’t have to navigate these charges alone or with a team that reacts instead of plans. By partnering with Feldman & Royle, you gain legal insight, courtroom experience, and a strategic mindset that few firms can match. The result is peace of mind, confidence in your defense, and the best possible outcome for your case.
No tags assigned to this post.
