Utah’s S.B. 19, the Digital Evidence Amendments, creates a new requirement for law enforcement agencies to have access to mobile device forensic capabilities. For agencies that routinely seize smartphones and tablets as evidence, the law is not just a compliance issue. It is a decision about how digital evidence will be examined, by whom, and how quickly.
This article answers the questions Utah agencies are likely to ask as they prepare for the law’s January 1, 2027 compliance deadline.
Utah S.B. 19 key facts
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What is S.B. 19? | Utah’s Digital Evidence Amendments law. |
| Who is affected? | Utah local law enforcement agencies. |
| What is required? | Access to mobile device forensic services. |
| What is the compliance deadline? | January 1, 2027 |
| What are the compliance options? | In-house services, shared services, or RCFL participation. |
What is Utah S.B. 19, the Digital Evidence Amendments?
Quick answer: Utah Senate Bill 19 (S.B. 19) requires local Utah law enforcement agencies to have access to mobile device forensic services by January 1, 2027.
In practical terms, the law requires agencies to ensure they have direct access to the capability to conduct mobile device forensic examinations or have a shared cooperative agreement.
When do Utah law enforcement agencies need to comply with S.B. 19?
Quick answer: Utah law enforcement agencies must comply with S.B. 19 by January 1, 2027 by meeting at least one of the compliance paths for handing cell phone and tablet digital evidence
Implementation decisions often involve budget planning, procurement processes, investigator training, and technology evaluation. Agencies that wait until late 2026 may have less flexibility when selecting their preferred path.
Utah S.B. 19 compliance timeline: How should agencies prepare before January 1, 2027?
Quick answer: Agencies that plan to establish or expand mobile forensic capabilities should begin planning well before the January 1, 2027 compliance deadline.
| Timeframe | Recommended Action |
|---|---|
| Now | Assess current mobile forensic capabilities and identify compliance gaps. |
| Budget and planning cycle | Determine which S.B. 19 compliance path the agency will use. |
| Procurement phase | Evaluate technology, service providers, training requirements, and staffing needs. |
| Implementation phase | Acquire technology, establish workflows, and train personnel. |
| Before January 1, 2027 | Document the selected compliance approach and ensure operational readiness. |
| January 1, 2027 | S.B. 19 compliance deadline. |
Which Utah agencies are affected by S.B. 19?
Quick answer: Utah S.B. 19 applies to local law enforcement agencies in Utah, including municipal police departments and county sheriff’s offices.
Agencies should review the statutory language and any implementing guidance to determine how the law applies to their organization. In general, agencies that investigate crimes involving digital evidence should assess whether their current access to mobile device forensic services aligns with the available compliance pathways.
What are the three ways an agency can meet the S.B. 19 requirement?
Quick answer: Utah law enforcement agencies can comply with S.B. 19 by establishing in-house mobile forensic services, sharing services through an agreement, or qualifying as a participating agency in the Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory (RCFL).
| Compliance Path | What It Means |
|---|---|
| In-house mobile forensics | Establish and maintain your own mobile forensic capability. |
| Shared services | Use another organization’s mobile forensic services through an agreement. |
| RCFL participation | Contribute at least 2,000 annual hours to the Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory (RCFL). |
This flexibility recognizes that agencies vary significantly in size, staffing, investigative workload, and available resources.
Should an agency build its own mobile forensics capability or use shared services?
Quick answer: The best S.B. 19 compliance approach depends on an agency’s case volume, response time requirements, staffing, evidence control needs, and long-term operational goals.
When does an in-house mobile forensics capability make sense?
| Consideration | In-House Capability May Be Best | Shared Services May Be Best |
|---|---|---|
| Device volume | Investigations routinely involve the presence of a mobile device. | Mobile devices are not commonly found to contain useful case information. |
| Response time | Immediate access needed | Delayed access acceptable |
| Staffing | Dedicated examiner available | Limited staffing |
| Evidence control | Agency wants direct control | Shared control acceptable |
| Outsourcing costs | The agency routinely relies on outside examinations, creating recurring costs and potential delays. | The agency only occasionally requires outside forensic assistance. |
Building own capabilities vs. using shared services: Four factors agencies should consider
The table above provides a quick way to evaluate which model may align best with an agency’s requirements. However, agencies should also consider several strategic factors that can affect long-term success.
1. Turnaround requirements
Investigations involving violent crime, child exploitation, narcotics trafficking, missing persons, or organized criminal activity often require immediate access to digital evidence. Agencies should evaluate whether external resources can consistently support investigative timelines.
2. Staffing and training
Building an internal capability requires more than technology. Agencies need personnel who can perform extractions, analyze evidence, generate reports, testify when required, and stay current with evolving mobile technologies. Training should be considered part of the implementation plan from the beginning.
3. Long-term ownership and licensing
Agencies evaluating an internal capability should consider how they will retain access to forensic tools over time. Licensing affects more than annual cost. It determines who controls the forensic capability and how long it remains available.
4. Budget and total cost of ownership
Technology, training, personnel, maintenance, and operational expenses all contribute to the total cost of ownership. Agencies should evaluate both implementation costs and the long-term cost of maintaining their chosen approach.
Perpetual licensing: Maintain control of your forensic capability
Oxygen Forensic® Detective is available with perpetual licensing. Agencies retain access to the software they purchase, so access does not lapse at the end of a subscription term.
Perpetual licensing can help a law enforcement agency:
- Maintain access to its forensic platform across budget cycles
- Avoid recurring credit meters for examinations
- Preserve access to existing case data and examination workflows
- Plan maintenance, updates, training, and growth separately
For agencies building an in-house mobile forensics program, perpetual licensing supports long-term control and ownership of the investigative capability.
Utah S.B. 19: The key question
The decision is not simply whether to buy software or outsource examinations. The question is whether the agency wants the ability to collect, examine, and report on mobile evidence when investigations require it.
For agencies with growing digital evidence demands, complying with Utah S.B. 19 presents an opportunity to build an internal capability providing the greatest control over investigative timelines, evidence handling, examiner workflows, and long-term ownership of the forensic process.
What should agencies look for in a mobile device forensics solution?
Quick answer: Agencies evaluating mobile forensic tools should assess device support, application and cloud coverage, examination workflows, reporting capabilities, training resources, update frequency, and licensing models.
A mobile device forensic solution should support both current investigative needs and future requirements. The following criteria can help agencies compare available options.
| Evaluation Criterion | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Breadth of device support | Determines whether investigators can extract and analyze data from the smartphones, tablets, and operating systems commonly encountered in investigations. |
| Application coverage | Provides access to evidence stored in messaging applications, social media platforms, and other third-party applications. |
| Cloud coverage | Enables the collection and analysis of evidence stored in cloud services, online accounts, and connected platforms. |
| Extraction and examination workflow | Supports collection, parsing, analysis, and review within a consistent forensic workflow. |
| Workflow efficiency through automation | Automation reduces manual review time and helps examiners process cases more efficiently. |
| Investigator control | Helps investigators maintain responsibility for reviewing evidence, making decisions, and developing findings. |
| Evidence review and collaboration | Helps examiners manage large volumes of media and document evidence, locate relevant information through OCR and media categorization, and support collaborative case review. |
| Reporting and defensibility | Produces clear, reproducible reports suitable for investigative review and courtroom presentation. |
| Update cadence | Maintains support for new devices, operating systems, applications, and cloud services as technologies evolve. |
| Training and technical support | Helps agencies build internal expertise and maintain examiner proficiency over time. |
| Licensing and ownership | Affects long-term control of forensic tools, budgeting flexibility, and access to the platform over time. |
| Total cost of ownership | Includes technology, training, maintenance, staffing, and operational costs associated with maintaining the capability. |
For agencies preparing for Utah S.B. 19 compliance, the most effective solution is often one that supports the entire examination workflow, from collection through reporting, rather than focusing only on data extraction.
How can Utah agencies prepare for the January 1, 2027 deadline?
Quick answer: Utah agencies should assess their current capabilities, select a compliance path, evaluate technology and training requirements, and complete implementation before January 1, 2027.
The most practical approach is to begin planning now and document a clear path to compliance.
Utah S.B. 19 Readiness Checklist
✅ Assess current mobile forensic capabilities
✅ Determine which statutory compliance pathway the agency will use
✅ Estimate expected mobile device evidence volume
✅ Identify staffing and training requirements
✅ Evaluate available technology and service options
✅ Compare internal capability versus shared-services models
✅ Establish budget and procurement timelines
✅ Develop policies and workflows for handling mobile evidence
✅ Document the selected compliance approach
✅ Complete technology acquisition and training before January 1, 2027
Agencies considering an internal capability should also build training into their implementation plans so personnel can begin conducting examinations effectively as soon as technology is deployed.
If you need help determining what the right path is, let’s talk.
How can Oxygen Forensics support a Utah agency’s mobile forensic capabilities?
Quick answer: Oxygen Forensic® Detective helps Utah agencies build an in-house mobile forensic capability by supporting collection, analysis, reporting, training, and long-term ownership within a single platform.
For agencies evaluating how to meet Utah S.B. 19 requirements, the decision is not simply about acquiring forensic software. It is about building a sustainable capability for collecting, examining, and reporting on mobile evidence while keeping investigators in control of the process.
How Oxygen Forensics aligns with common mobile forensics evaluation criteria
| Evaluation Criterion | What Agencies Should Look For | Oxygen Forensic® Detective Capability |
|---|---|---|
| Breadth of device support | Support for the smartphones, tablets, and operating systems investigators encounter most often. | Supports extraction and analysis from 35,000+ mobile devices, including Apple, Android, and KaiOS devices. |
| Applications | Access to data stored in messaging applications, social media platforms, and third-party apps. | Supports analysis of 50,000+ application versions, helping investigators examine data from a broad range of mobile applications. |
| Cloud coverage | Ability to collect evidence stored in cloud services and connected accounts. | Supports extraction from 100+ cloud services, including dozens of services available exclusively through Oxygen’s cloud collection capabilities. |
| Extraction and examination workflow | Collection, parsing, review, analysis, and reporting within a consistent workflow. | Provides an end-to-end workflow from acquisition through analysis and reporting in a single platform. |
| Workflow efficiency | Tools that reduce manual review time and help examiners process cases more quickly. | Built-in analytics and automated processing help investigators identify relevant communications, locations, media, and application data faster. |
| Investigator control | Technology that assists examinations without replacing examiner judgment. | Purpose-built analytical tools surface relevant data while the examiner remains responsible for all investigative conclusions. |
| Image and media analysis | Efficient review of large collections of images, videos, screenshots, and recordings. | Includes facial and image categorization, OCR, speech-to-text transcription, and translation capabilities. |
| Reporting and defensibility | Clear, reproducible reports suitable for case files and courtroom presentation. | Supports customizable reporting for investigative review, evidence disclosure, and courtroom use. |
| Update cadence | Regular support for new devices, operating systems, apps, and cloud services. | Frequent product updates help agencies maintain access to emerging devices, applications, and evidence sources. |
| Training and certification | Training that helps agencies build internal expertise and sustainable workflows. | Offers instructor-led training and certification programs for examiners and investigators. |
| Licensing and ownership | Long-term access to the forensic platform and predictable budgeting. | Perpetual licensing allows agencies to retain access to purchased software and maintain long-term ownership of their forensic capability. |
| Total cost of ownership | Sustainable investment that supports long-term operational needs. | Combines acquisition, analysis, reporting, training, and examiner productivity tools within a single platform, reducing reliance on multiple solutions. |
Why this matters for Utah S.B. 19
Agencies evaluating the “establish in-house forensic services” path under S.B. 19 should assess more than extraction capabilities alone. Device support, cloud access, examiner efficiency, reporting, training, and long-term ownership all affect the agency’s ability to collect, examine, and report on mobile evidence when investigations require it.
Oxygen Forensic® Detective is a comprehensive digital forensics platform designed to support the full mobile forensics workflow, from data acquisition through analysis, reporting, and courtroom presentation. For agencies considering the in-house capability path under S.B. 19, Oxygen addresses many of the same criteria agencies should use when evaluating any mobile forensic solution.
A practical path to S.B. 19 readiness
The agencies best positioned for the January 1, 2027 deadline will have more than access to mobile forensic technology. They will have trained personnel, documented workflows, efficient examination capabilities, and long-term control of their mobile forensic program. Oxygen Forensic® Detective combines broad device and cloud support, integrated analytics, examiner-focused workflows, training resources, and perpetual licensing to help agencies build a sustainable mobile device forensic capability rather than a temporary technology solution.
Whether your agency plans to establish its own forensic services or is evaluating available options, Oxygen Forensics can help assess case volume, staffing requirements, workflow needs, and technology considerations.
Request a consultation or product demonstration to see how Oxygen Forensic® Detective can support your agency’s mobile forensic strategy before the January 1, 2027 compliance deadline.
FAQ: Utah S.B. 19
Does S.B. 19 require every police department to have its own forensic lab?
No. The statute provides multiple compliance pathways, including shared-service arrangements and participation in the Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory (RCFL).
Does S.B. 19 require agencies to purchase forensic software?
Not necessarily. Agencies may choose different approaches depending on which compliance pathway they use and how they obtain mobile device forensic services.
Can agencies share mobile forensic services?
Yes. One of the compliance options allows agencies to enter into agreements to use another entity’s mobile device forensic services.
What types of devices are covered?
The statute focuses on mobile device forensic capabilities. Agencies should review the law’s language and applicable guidance for specific definitions and scope.
When does Utah S.B. 19 go into effect?
January 1, 2027 is the compliance deadline associated with Utah S.B. 19’s mobile device forensic requirement.
Should smaller agencies build their own capability?
It depends on factors such as case volume, staffing availability, turnaround requirements, budget, and reliance on external examinations. Many agencies will benefit from evaluating both internal and shared-service approaches before making a decision.