California law gives a layperson two separate protections in Civil Code section 1714.22. Carrying naloxone and handing it to someone at risk of an overdose, or to someone in a position to help, cannot lead to criminal prosecution for that possession or distribution. Giving a dose to someone who is overdosing, in good faith and not for pay, does not make you liable for civil damages unless your conduct amounts to gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct.

Anyone in a position to help may carry and hand out naloxone

Civil Code section 1714.22(c)(3) says a person at risk of an overdose, “or any person in a position to assist a person at risk of an overdose,” may possess an opioid antagonist and then dispense or distribute it to a person at risk or to anyone else in a position to assist. That is not limited to doctors, nurses, or paramedics; a friend or relative who keeps naloxone on hand to help someone at risk fits the text. The statute defines “opioid antagonist” as naloxone hydrochloride or any other opioid antagonist approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration “for the treatment of an opioid overdose.”

The criminal-law protection covers possessing and distributing

Section 1714.22(e)(1) opens with “Notwithstanding any other law.” It says a person who possesses or distributes an opioid antagonist “for the purposes specified in subdivision (b) or (c)” shall “not be subject to professional review or be subject to criminal prosecution for their possession or distribution.” For a layperson, the relevant purpose is the one in (c)(3): keeping naloxone to help someone at risk of an overdose and passing it on for that reason.

That protection is written for possession and distribution. For the act of giving someone a dose, the protection the section spells out is the civil one below; the section does not separately address criminal charges for administering naloxone.

The civil protection covers giving a dose

Section 1714.22(e)(2) covers the rescue itself. A person who administers an opioid antagonist “in good faith and not for compensation” to someone “who is experiencing or is suspected of experiencing an overdose” is “not liable for civil damages resulting from any act or omission relating to such administration.” The exception comes in the same sentence: “other than an act or omission constituting gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct.”

That text sets three conditions:

  • Good faith. You gave the dose to help the person.
  • Not for compensation. The protection is written for someone who is not paid to administer it.
  • An actual or suspected overdose. Certainty is not required; the text covers a person “suspected of experiencing an overdose.”

A bad outcome by itself does not remove the protection. It applies to damages from any act or omission relating to the administration, and the only exception it states is gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct. Whether particular conduct crosses that line depends on the facts.

This is not the 911 Good Samaritan law

These naloxone protections are separate from Health and Safety Code section 11376.5, which, under its own conditions, makes being under the influence or possessing drugs for personal use not a crime for a person who seeks medical help for an overdose and for the person who overdosed. Someone who both calls for help and gives naloxone may need to look at both statutes.

If you gave naloxone and are facing questions

How section 1714.22 applies depends on what happened: how you had the naloxone, why you gave it, and what you did during the emergency. The Law Offices of David S. Chesley’s fentanyl charges team can go through the facts with you. Call (800) 755-5174.