The state accuses the defendant of having committed the offense of injury to a child by act.

Relevant Statutes

A person commits the offense of injury to a child by act if he intentionally or knowingly by an act causes serious bodily injury to a child.

Definitions

Bodily Injury

“Bodily injury” means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.

Serious Bodily Injury

“Serious bodily injury” means bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.

Intentionally Causing Serious Bodily Injury

A person intentionally causes serious bodily injury to a child if the person has the conscious objective or desire to cause that serious bodily injury to the child.

Knowingly Causing Serious Bodily Injury

A person knowingly causes serious bodily injury to a child if the person is aware that his conduct is reasonably certain to cause that serious bodily injury to the child.

Application of Law to Facts

You must determine whether the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, five elements. The elements are that—

1. the defendant, in [county] County, Texas, on or about [date], [insert act, e.g., struck [name] with his fist];
2. the defendant [insert act, e.g., by striking [name] with his fist] caused injury to [name];
3. [name] was a child fourteen years old or younger;
4. the injury caused to [name] was serious bodily injury; and
5. the defendant—
   1. intended to cause serious bodily injury to [name]; or
   2. knew he would cause serious bodily injury to [name].

You must all agree on elements 1 through 5 listed above, but you do not have to agree on the culpable mental states listed in elements 5.a or 5.b above.

If you all agree the state has failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, one or more of elements 1 through 5 listed above, you must find the defendant “not guilty.”

[Select one of the following.]

If you all agree the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the five elements listed above, you must find the defendant “guilty.”

[or]

If you all agree the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the five elements listed above, you must next consider whether the defendant is not guilty because of the defense of [reasonable medical care under the direction of a physician/emergency medical care administered in good faith].

[Include one of the following if raised by the evidence. If other defenses are raised by the evidence, include the appropriate instructions; see CPJC 22.14 through CPJC 22.16.]

Reasonable Medical Care

It is a defense to the offense of injury to a child that the act consisted of reasonable medical care occurring under the direction of or by a licensed physician.

Burden of Proof

The defendant is not required to prove that the defense of reasonable medical care applies to this case. Rather, the state must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant’s act was not reasonable medical care occurring under the direction of or by a licensed physician.

Application of Law to Facts

To decide the issue of reasonable medical care, you must decide whether the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the act of [insert act, e.g., striking with the fist] was not reasonable medical care occurring under the direction of or by a licensed physician.

[or]

Emergency Medical Care

It is a defense to the offense of injury to a child that the act consisted of emergency medical care administered in good faith and with reasonable care by a person not licensed in the healing arts.

Burden of Proof

The defendant is not required to prove that the defense of emergency medical care applies to this case. Rather, the state must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant’s act was not emergency medical care administered in good faith and with reasonable care by a person not licensed in the healing arts.

Application of Law to Facts

To decide the issue of emergency medical care, you must decide whether the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the act of [insert act, e.g., striking with the fist] was not emergency medical care administered in good faith and with reasonable care by a person not licensed in the healing arts.

[Continue with the following.]

If you all agree the state has failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, at least one of these matters, you must find the defendant “not guilty.”

If you all agree the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the elements of the offense of injury to a child, and you all agree the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant did not act to provide [reasonable/emergency] medical care, you must find the defendant “guilty.”

[Insert any other instructions raised by the evidence. Then continue with the verdict form found in CPJC 2.1, the general charge.]