New Crime of Exposing a Child to Controlled Substances and Other 2025 Drug Law Changes – North Carolina Criminal Law

As regular readers know, the General Assembly passed a slew of statutes affecting our criminal law this summer, including controlled substances law.  In S.L. 2025-70 (S.B. 429), the legislature created the new offense of exposing a child to a controlled substance. The same session law increased the penalties for most fentanyl offenses. With  S.L. 2025-71 (S.B. 311), the legislature created several new crimes addressing the unauthorized possession or distribution of embalming fluid. These changes all become effective December 1, 2025. Read on for the details.   

Exposing a Child to Controlled Substances. Under the new G.S. 14-318.7, exposing a child to a controlled substance will be a felony offense. The statute defines “child” as any person under 16 years old. Controlled substances are broadly defined by reference to G.S. 90-87, which includes all drugs covered by Schedules I through VI. G.S. 90-87(5). If a person knowingly, intentionally, or with reckless disregard for human life causes or allows a child to be exposed to a controlled substance, he or she is guilty of a class H felony offense. If the child is exposed to a controlled substance and ingests the substance, it becomes a class E felony. G.S. 14-318.7(a)(3). If serious physical injury results from the ingestion of the substance, the offense class rises to a class D felony. If serious bodily injury results, it rises again to a class C felony. If death results, the crime is a Class B1 felony.

The statute defines “ingest” as “any means used to take into the body, to eat or drink, or otherwise consume or absorb into the body in any way.” Serious physical injury and serious bodily injury are defined by reference to G.S. 14-318.4, our felony child abuse law. “Serious physical injury” means injury causing great pain and suffering, including serious mental injury. “Serious bodily injury” means an injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes serious permanent disfigurement, coma, a permanent or protracted condition that causes extreme pain, permanent or protracted loss of impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or that results in prolonged hospitalization. (My colleague Brittany Bromell created an excellent resource on distinguishing different levels of injury in the assault context, here.)

What Counts as Exposure? The statute does not define the term “expose.” According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, one definition of the word is to “cause to be visible or open to view.” Assuming courts adopt a similar meaning, the statute would seemingly apply when a person knowingly, intentionally, or with reckless disregard leaves a controlled substance in a place where it can be seen or otherwise perceived by a child and a child in fact perceives the substance. It appears that simply possessing controlled substances where children are present, by itself, does not qualify as exposure; a child must encounter the controlled substance in some way.

The statute also carves out a narrow exception for a person who intentionally gives a child a controlled substance that has been prescribed for the child by a licensed medical professional when given in the appropriate dose and manner. G.S. 14-318.7(h).

How Does the Exposure Offense Relate to Other Crimes? Subsection (g) of the new offense provides that the punishments set forth above apply “unless the conduct is covered by under some other provision of the law providing greater punishment.” This presumably means that a defendant may receive only the most serious punishment available under the law and cannot be sentenced for both exposing a minor to a controlled substance and another, more serious crime (such as a higher-class felony child abuse offense) based on the same conduct. See, e.g., State v. Jones, 237 N.C. App. 526, 530-31 (2014) (defendant could not be convicted of intimidating a witness and violating a DVPO based on the same conduct due to ‘unless otherwise covered’ language in DVPO statute); State v. Williams, 201 N.C. App. 161, 174 (2009) (same for multiple assaults based on language in G.S. 14-33); State v. Davis, 364 N.C. 297, 304 (same for felony death by motor vehicle and second degree murder based on language in G.S. 20-141.4).

Note, though, that subsection (b) of both our child abuse statutes expressly provides that child abuse is an additional offense and is not meant to preclude other civil or criminal sanctions. G.S. 14-318.2 (misdemeanor); G.S. 14-318.4 (felony). Reading these provisions alongside the new G.S. 14-318.7(g), it seems likely that a defendant may be charged with both child abuse and exposing a child to a controlled substance based on the same incident.  Because of the “unless otherwise covered” language in the exposure statute, though, when the other crime imposes a greater penalty for the conduct, the defendant can presumably be sentenced only for the more serious offense.

Who Can Commit the Offense? Child abuse offenses apply only to someone who is a parent or other person providing care or supervision to a child. The new exposure offense applies to any person. Minor children are not excepted, so it may be possible for a child under 16 to commit the offense by exposing other children to a controlled substance. If, for instance, a group of 15-year-old teenagers smoke marijuana together, have they each committed the offense of exposing each other to a controlled substance? A minor so charged might argue that application of the statute to them runs contrary to the statute’s purpose of protecting minors, but nothing in the law specifically excludes minors from its reach.

What’s the Unit of Prosecution? What if more than one child is exposed to a controlled substance in a single event?  The statute is presumably designed to protect individual children from exposure to controlled substances. The plain language of the statute makes it a crime to cause or permit “a” child to be exposed to illegal drugs. Similarly, G.S. 14-190.17(a) prohibits possession of “a” visual representation of a minor engaged in sexual activity. The Court of Appeals has interpreted this provision to permit multiple prosecutions for each exploitative image. State v. Howell, 169 N.C. App. 58, 62 (2005) (discussing the significance of the use of “a” versus “any” in statutory interpretation). The use of the phrase “a child” in the exposure statute coupled with the purpose of the law indicates that the legislature intended to punish a defendant for each child who is exposed to or ingests illegal drugs.

What if a single child is exposed to multiple controlled substances at once? Once again, the statute refers to exposure to or ingestion by a child to “a” controlled substance. Under the rationale of Howell, a defendant may be on the hook for each controlled substance to which a child is exposed in a single incident. On the other hand, there is an argument that the gravamen of the offense is protecting children from exposure to illegal drugs, generally, without regard to the specifics of the controlled substance. For instance, the statute does not impose different levels of liability depending on the type or amount of controlled substance. It may be that the legislature intended to impose criminal liability based on each exposure event, not each drug to which a child is exposed in a single event. We will have to wait and see how our courts interpret this provision in that context. (For more on units of prosecution, check out this bulletin by my colleague Brittany Bromell.)

Other Thoughts. Under current law, mere exposure of a child to a controlled substance likely qualifies only as a class A1 misdemeanor pursuant to G.S. 14-318.2 (prohibiting a person from creating or allowing a substantial risk of physical injury to a child by other than accidental means). See State v. Thomas, 217 N.C. App. 198 (2011) (unpublished) (finding evidence that the defendant exposed his child to controlled substances sufficient to support a conviction for misdemeanor child abuse). The level of criminal liability also currently does not change if the child ingests a controlled substance but is not injured by it. Only if the child suffers serious injury from the ingestion of the controlled substance could felony child abuse liability potentially attach. In that situation, the ingestion of drugs causing serious physical injury could constitute class G felony child abuse, while causing serious bodily injury could constitute the class E version. After Dec. 1, 2025, as stated above, exposure of a child to a controlled substance will be a class H felony at a minimum, with increasing penalties if the child ingests the substance (class E), is harmed by ingestion of the substance (class D or C, depending on the injury), or is killed by it (class B1).

Increased Punishments for Fentanyl Offenses. Fentanyl and carfentanil are classified as Schedule II substances under G.S. 90-90(2)e & h, while fentanyl derivatives are classified as Schedule I drugs pursuant to G.S. 90-89(1a). Normally, possession with intent to sell or deliver, manufacturing, and delivery of Schedule I or II substances are punished as class H felonies, while a sale of a Schedule I or II substance is punishable as a class G felony. G.S. 90-95(b)(1). Under the new G.S. 90-95(b)(1b), the sale, delivery, manufacturing, and possession with intent to sell or deliver of fentanyl or carfentanil will all be punished as class F felonies.

Under G.S. 90-95(d)(2), possession of fentanyl or carfentanil is currently punishable as a class I felony. Under the amended version of that subsection, possession of fentanyl and carfentanil will become class H felonies.

Under G.S. 90-95(h)(4), trafficking in opium, opioids (such as fentanyl and carfentanil), and opiates is currently punished in the following ways:

•  For possession of four grams or more, but less than 14 grams, the offense is a class F felony, punishable by 70-93 months mandatory imprisonment, with a $500,000.00 fine if the substance is heroin, fentanyl, or carfentanil, and a fine of at least $50,000.00 for all other types of opium, opioids, and opiates.
• For possession of more than 14 grams but less than 28 grams, the offense is a class E offense, punishable by 90-120 months mandatory imprisonment, with a fine of $750,000.00 for offenses involving heroin, fentanyl, or carfentanil, and a fine of at least $100,000.00 for other types of covered substances.
• For possession of more than 28 grams, the offense is a class C felony, punishable by 225-282 months mandatory imprisonment, with a fine of $1,000,000.00 for offenses involving heroin, fentanyl, or carfentanil, and a fine of at least $500,000.00 for other types of covered substances.

On and after December 1, 2025, new subsection G.S. 90-95(h)(4c) modifies that sentencing scheme. While the punishment for trafficking other opiates and opioids, including heroin, remains unchanged, there will be increased penalties for the lower levels of trafficking fentanyl or carfentanil in the following ways:

• For possession of four grams or more, but less than 14 grams of fentanyl or carfentanil, the offense will be a class E felony, punishable by a mandatory 90-120 months imprisonment.
• For possession of more than 14 grams, but less than 28 grams, the offense will be class D felony, punishable by a mandatory 175-222 months imprisonment.

The new amendment does not change the fine amounts for these offenses. While trafficking fentanyl and carfentanil over 28 grams is now in the new (4c) subsection, the penalty and fine for that version was left unchanged (although it was moved to a different subsection)—225-282 months imprisonment and a one million dollar fine. (I wrote about earlier legislation imposing elevated fines for fentanyl, carfentanil, and heroin here.)

These changes seem relatively straightforward, but court system actors should be aware of the increased penalties kicking in on December 1, 2025.

Other New Drug Crimes. Finally, G.S. 90-113.154 (2025). creates the new crime of illegal possession of embalming fluid – that it, possession for any purpose other than the preservation of dead bodies – with punishments ranging from a class I felony to a class D felony depending on the amount of the substance. There is also a new class I felony for unlawful sale or distribution of the substance (in addition to other, similar prohibitions like offering embalming fluid for sale or displaying it for sale). G.S. 90-210.29C (2025). Finally, subsection (c3) of the Good Samaritan law for people who report drug overdoses was amended to add possession of less than 28 grams of embalming fluid to the controlled substances covered by the law. You can check those out in more detail on the first page of bill, linked above.

Please feel free to reach out to me as always at dixon@sog.unc.edu with any questions or comments.