Penal code 632

UPDATED: Apr 14, 2009

Advertiser Disclosure

It’s all about you. We want to help you make the right legal decisions.

We strive to help you make confident insurance and legal decisions. Finding trusted and reliable insurance quotes and legal advice should be easy. This doesn’t influence our content. Our opinions are our own.

Get Legal Help Today

Compare Quotes From Top Companies and Save

secured lock Secured with SHA-256 Encryption

Penal code 632

In California, if you record a conversation (yourself and two other people) without asking permission and 30 minutes into the meeting it is discussed that you are recording and one person say I knew since I heard the beep at the beginning and one say I did not know, yet the meeting continues for another 15 minutes and no one asks the recording to stop. Are you covered under implied consent? Or are you still in violation of the law? Thanks,

Asked on April 14, 2009 under Criminal Law, California


N. K., Member, Iowa and Illinois Bar / FreeAdvice Contributing Attorney

Answered 13 years ago | Contributor

You have to intentionally and without consent record the conversation. In this case, one person said that he knew from the beginning that he was being recorded and he never objected. So, he probably consented. The second person says he didn't know, and you didn't ask his consent in the beginning of the conversation. Yet, after he was notified of the recording, he continued the meeting without objecting. This could be implied consent. The problem is that the code doesn't provide a definition for what constitutes "consent."

You may need to consult a lawyer who has handled cases under this particular code provision or invasion of privacy cases.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The Answer(s) provided above are for general information only. The attorney providing the answer was not serving as the attorney for the person submitting the question or in any attorney-client relationship with such person. Laws may vary from state to state, and sometimes change. Tiny variations in the facts, or a fact not set forth in a question, often can change a legal outcome or an attorney's conclusion. Although has verified the attorney was admitted to practice law in at least one jurisdiction, he or she may not be authorized to practice law in the jurisdiction referred to in the question, nor is he or she necessarily experienced in the area of the law involved. Unlike the information in the Answer(s) above, upon which you should NOT rely, for personal advice you can rely upon we suggest you retain an attorney to represent you.

Get Legal Help Today

Find the right lawyer for your legal issue.

secured lock Secured with SHA-256 Encryption