Florida Police Are Quietly Buying Meta Smart Glasses. Here Is Why Your Defense Lawyer Should Care.

Public records show two Florida sheriff’s offices have bought Meta’s camera-equipped smart glasses. Florida’s body-camera statute — and the discovery rules in every criminal case — have something to say about that.

At least two Florida law enforcement agencies have purchased Meta’s camera-equipped Ray-Ban smart glasses, according to procurement records surfaced through MuckRock and reported by Miami New Times in early August. The Broward County Sheriff’s Office bought several pairs in May 2025 for its undercover Internet Crimes Against Children unit and declined to say how they are used, citing public-records exemptions for surveillance techniques. The Okeechobee County Sheriff’s Office bought about six pairs in October 2024 and says its officers use them for remote IT troubleshooting. Broward also refused to produce any policy governing when officers may record with the glasses or how footage is stored and retained.

Unlike a body camera mounted on a uniform, smart glasses look like ordinary eyewear. The only outward sign of recording is a small LED that privacy advocates note can be missed in a crowd or obscured. Federal border agents have already been documented wearing the glasses during immigration enforcement operations in other states. Whatever one thinks of the technology, the Florida records raise a question that matters enormously in criminal cases: when an officer’s glasses are a camera, where does the footage go?

Florida already has a framework for cameras worn on officers

Florida’s body-camera statute, section 943.1718, Florida Statutes (2025), defines a body camera as a portable electronic recording device, worn on a law enforcement officer’s person, that records audio and video data. Read that definition again with smart glasses in mind — a recording device worn on the officer’s person is exactly what they are. Agencies that permit body cameras must adopt policies covering proper use, maintenance, and storage; must train personnel on those policies; must retain the recordings in accordance with Florida’s public records retention requirements; and must periodically review actual practice for compliance. The statute also exempts law enforcement body-camera recordings from Florida’s wiretap chapter — an exemption that presupposes the recordings happen inside a regulated program.

That is what makes an agency’s refusal to produce a smart-glasses policy significant. If camera glasses are being used to record encounters but are treated as something other than body cameras, the recordings may be happening outside the statute’s policy, training, retention, and review requirements entirely. A recording device with no retention policy is a recording device whose footage can disappear.

The defense questions in every case

For anyone charged with a crime, hidden or informal recording devices cut both ways, and both ways matter. Footage can incriminate — but it can also contradict a report, capture an unlawful search, preserve an exculpatory statement, or show that a consent to search was anything but voluntary. Florida’s criminal discovery rule requires the State to disclose electronic recordings connected to the case, and due process requires the State to turn over evidence favorable to the defense. Those obligations do not depend on what the recording device is called. If an officer recorded with smart glasses, a phone, a drone, or a doorbell camera, the defense is entitled to know the recording exists and to get it.

So the questions we now ask in discovery are expanding: What recording devices did every officer on scene carry or wear? Was any device capable of recording audio or video? What was recorded, where is it stored, what retention schedule applies, and has anything been deleted? If footage that should exist is missing — because a device sat outside the agency’s body-camera program — that absence itself becomes a litigation issue, from suppression arguments to jury instructions about missing evidence.

If you are facing charges and suspect there is footage the reports never mention, do not assume it is gone or that it hurts you. There is hope: Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer Tonmiel Rodriguez knows how to find out what was recorded and make the State account for it.

Legally reviewed by Tonmiel Rodriguez · Last reviewed August 2026

Tonmiel Rodriguez is a criminal defense attorney in Bartow, Florida. If you are facing charges and believe there is footage the reports never mention — from smart glasses, a body camera, or any other recording device — call The Rodriguez Law Office at (863) 774-4556.