A conviction for recklessly causing injury to a child is affirmed as the court of appeals applied the correct legal standard in determining whether the evidence "raised" the "Good Samaritan" defense in this case, when holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the defense. In order to obtain an instruction on the "Good Samaritan" defense embodied in Section 22.04(k) of the Penal Code, an appellant must show that the record contains evidence sufficient to support a rational finding, not that she lacked the requisite mental state necessary to commit the offense, but that she in fact harbored the requisite mental state, but nevertheless engaged in the conduct under emergency circumstances, in good faith, and with reasonable care.