Does the court have a duty to instruct the jury on voluntary and attempted voluntary manslaughter?

Appellant contends the court should have instructed the jury on voluntary and attempted voluntary manslaughter based on heat of passion and imperfect self-defense. The trial court has a duty to instruct on any lesser included offense of that charged "when the evidence raises a question as to whether all the elements of the charged offense were present, but not when there is no evidence that the offense committed was less than that charged. [Citation.]" (People v. Cruz (2008) 44 Cal.4th 636, 664.) The duty arises only when substantial evidence supports a reasonable conclusion "that the lesser offense, but not the greater, was committed [citation]"; it does not arise when there is merely "'any evidence . . . no matter how weak.' [Citation.]" (Ibid.)