Does the invited error doctrine apply to a jury in a second degree murder case?

Our decision in People v. Bunyard, supra, 45 Cal.3d 1189, 249 Cal.Rptr. 71, 756 P.2d 795, reiterates this understanding. In Bunyard, the defendant, who had been convicted of the first degree murder of a pregnant woman and her fetus, contended on appeal that the trial court had erred in failing to give a second degree murder instruction with regard to the killing of the fetus. In response to the Attorney General's assertion that the claim was barred by the invited error doctrine, defendant argued that the record did not disclose whether his trial counsel's request "was tactically based on an accurate understanding of applicable law, or on the ignorant or mistaken impression that no instruction on second degree murder on an implied-malice theory as to the fetus was appropriate under the facts adduced at trial." (Id., at pp. 1234-1235, 249 Cal.Rptr. 71, 756 P.2d 795, italics added.) Defendant argued that it was reasonable to conclude that "the defense's request that the jury not be instructed on second degree murder with respect to the fetus was based not on informed tactical considerations, but on ignorance and the mistaken view that no theory of second degree murder was factually applicable to the death of the fetus," and contended that under such circumstances the invited error doctrine should not be applied. (Id., at p. 1235, 249 Cal.Rptr. 71, 756 P.2d 795, italics added.)