Invasion of Privacy in Colorado: Criminal Charges and Civil Claims

Invasion of privacy in Colorado is handled through two parallel systems: criminal statutes that can send an offender to jail for conduct like secret filming, illegal recording, stalking, or posting intimate images, and civil lawsuits that let a victim recover money damages under three recognized privacy torts. Which law applies depends on what happened, where it happened, and whether the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy at the time.

What Counts as Criminal Invasion of Privacy

The statute that carries the name is narrower than most people expect. Criminal invasion of privacy applies when someone knowingly observes or photographs another person’s intimate parts without consent, in a situation where that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.¹ Filming someone walking down a sidewalk or recording a neighbor’s front lawn from a public street does not fit. Hidden cameras in changing rooms, bathrooms, or bedrooms typically do.

“Photograph” is defined broadly. It covers video, live feeds, digital images, and any other visual material produced mechanically, electronically, or chemically, which pulls in drones, phones, and body-worn recorders.¹

The offense is a class 2 misdemeanor. For conduct on or after March 1, 2022, that means up to 120 days in jail, a fine of up to $750, or both.²

Recording Conversations Without Consent

Colorado is a one-party consent state. If you are part of a conversation, you can record it without telling anyone else on the line or in the room. Record a conversation you are not part of, without permission from at least one participant, and it becomes a crime.³

The wiretapping statute reaches further than phone taps. It prohibits knowingly intercepting, recording, or copying any telephone, telegraph, or electronic communication without consent from at least one sender or receiver. It also bars using or disclosing information you know came from an illegal intercept, and installing any device designed to intercept messages on someone else’s equipment.³

Wiretapping is a class 2 misdemeanor, the same tier as criminal invasion of privacy: up to 120 days in jail and up to a $750 fine.²

Sharing Intimate Images Without Consent

Colorado’s “revenge porn” law, formally the offense of posting a private image for harassment, applies to anyone 18 or older who posts or distributes through social media or any website an image showing another person’s intimate parts or sexual acts. To convict, the prosecution has to show the poster intended to harass, intimidate, or coerce the person depicted; acted without consent, or in a situation where the person reasonably expected the image to stay private; and caused serious emotional distress.⁴

This is a class 1 misdemeanor, a step above the general criminal-invasion offense. It carries up to 364 days in jail, and the court must impose a fine of up to $10,000 in addition to any other sentence. Those fines go to the state’s crime victim compensation fund.⁴

Two provisions inside the statute are worth flagging. It is not a defense that the image was partially digitally created or altered, or that the intimate parts were digitally generated, which pulls AI-generated content into the law’s reach. And images related to newsworthy events are carved out. Internet service providers and telecommunications companies are shielded from liability for content their users post.⁴

Victims also have a separate civil cause of action under the same statute. Recovery is the greater of $10,000 or actual damages, plus exemplary damages and reasonable attorney’s fees.⁴

Stalking and Repeated Surveillance

Stalking overlaps heavily with privacy violations because it often involves persistent surveillance and unwanted digital contact. A person commits stalking by repeatedly following, contacting, or placing someone under surveillance in a way that causes serious emotional distress, or by making credible threats combined with repeated contact or surveillance.

Penalties are heavier than for the misdemeanor privacy offenses. A first offense is a class 5 felony carrying one to three years in prison. A second offense within seven years is a class 4 felony with two to six years. Penalties escalate again if a protective order or court-imposed condition was in place when the stalking occurred. Colorado also classifies stalking as an extraordinary risk crime, which adds six months to the maximum sentence in the presumptive range.

Unauthorized Access to Devices and Accounts

When someone gets into your phone, computer, or online accounts without permission and pulls out personal data, the cybercrime statute is the usual charge. It prohibits knowingly accessing a computer system without authorization or exceeding your authorized access.⁵

Penalties scale with the dollar amount of loss, damage, or value involved. Cases under $300 are petty offenses; $300 to $999 is a class 2 misdemeanor; $1,000 to $1,999 is a class 1 misdemeanor; and once the value crosses $2,000 the offense becomes a felony, with the felony class rising through the $5,000, $20,000, and $100,000 thresholds.⁵ Felony convictions carry mandatory parole on top of the prison term.⁶

Suing Someone for Invasion of Privacy

Colorado recognizes three civil privacy torts. Each is a stand-alone claim you can bring in civil court, separate from any criminal case.

Intrusion upon seclusion. Someone intentionally invades your private space or affairs in a way a reasonable person would find highly offensive. Hidden cameras in a bathroom, unauthorized GPS tracking on your car, and someone rifling through your private records are typical examples. The Colorado Supreme Court first recognized this claim in Rugg v. McCarty (1970).

Public disclosure of private facts. Someone publicly reveals truthful but private information about you that is not a matter of legitimate public concern and that a reasonable person would find offensive. Medical conditions, sexual history, and private financial details are common subjects. The court adopted this tort in Robert C. Ozer, P.C. v. Borquez (1997).

Appropriation of name or likeness. Someone uses your identity for commercial benefit without permission, such as putting your photo in advertising or profiting from your name. The court adopted a form of this tort in Joe Dickerson & Associates, LLC v. Dittmar (2001).

Colorado does not recognize false light invasion of privacy. The Colorado Supreme Court declined to adopt it in Denver Publishing Co. v. Bueno (2002). If someone portrayed you in a misleading way, the available claim is defamation, which has different elements and defenses.

A successful civil case can produce compensatory damages for both tangible losses (medical bills, lost income, relocation costs) and intangible harm like emotional distress and reputational damage. Exemplary damages, Colorado’s term for punitive damages, are available when the defendant’s conduct involved fraud, malice, or willful and wanton behavior, but they are capped at the amount of actual damages the jury awards. If the defendant continued the harmful behavior during the lawsuit or deliberately worsened it, the court can increase exemplary damages up to three times actual damages.⁷

Courts can also grant injunctive relief, ordering someone to stop distributing images, remove surveillance equipment, or cease unauthorized contact. Injunctions matter because they stop ongoing harm rather than only compensating for past harm.

Consent, Public Interest, and Reasonable Expectation

Three defenses shape almost every privacy case in Colorado.

Consent is the most direct. If the person agreed to the recording, observation, or disclosure, there is no violation. Consent can be explicit through a signed release or implied from the circumstances, and the accused carries the burden of showing it was genuine and voluntary. In the recording context, consent from a single participant is enough.

Public interest applies most often to the tort of public disclosure of private facts. If the information is a matter of legitimate public concern, the claim fails. Courts weigh the nature of the information against the public’s interest in knowing it, and public figures receive less protection on matters connected to their public roles. The posting-private-images statute carries a parallel carve-out for newsworthy events.⁴

A reasonable expectation of privacy is both an element of several offenses and a natural ceiling on their reach. In a public place where anyone can see you, it is hard to claim a reasonable expectation of privacy in your general appearance or activities. The criminal invasion of privacy statute applies only where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy, and that is where most factual disputes concentrate: was the place and situation one where privacy was objectively reasonable?¹

Deadline to File a Civil Claim

Civil invasion of privacy claims in Colorado have to be filed within two years of when the cause of action accrues, under the general limitations provision for civil actions not covered by a more specific rule.⁸ The clock typically starts when you discover, or reasonably should have discovered, the violation. That matters in hidden-surveillance cases that may not come to light for months or years.

Miss the two-year window and the civil claim is almost certainly gone, no matter how strong the facts. Criminal prosecution runs on its own timelines set by the district attorney, so a police report is not a substitute for filing suit if you also want damages.

1
Justia. Colorado Code 18-7-801 – Criminal Invasion of Privacy
2
Justia. Colorado Code 18-1.3-501 – Misdemeanors – Penalties
3
Justia. Colorado Code 18-9-303 – Wiretapping Prohibited
4
Justia. Colorado Code 18-7-107 – Posting a Private Image for Harassment
5
Justia. Colorado Code 18-5.5-102 – Cybercrime
6
Justia. Colorado Code 18-1.3-401 – Felonies – Presumptive Sentencing
7
Justia. Colorado Code 13-21-102 – Exemplary Damages
8
Justia. Colorado Code 13-80-102 – General Limitation of Actions