In what circumstances would a jury have found that a knife was a deadly or dangerous weapon?

In sum, (1) defense counsel conceded the knife was a weapon; (2) the evidence supports a finding that the knife was capable of inflicting great bodily injury; and (3) the evidence supports a finding that defendant intended to use the knife as a weapon. Therefore, we conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the jury would have found the knife was a deadly or dangerous weapon absent the error. (See generally People v. Merritt, supra, 2 Cal.5th 819 at p. 831 ["whether it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that [the] jury would have rendered the same verdict absent the error"].) The trial court's error was harmless. (Ibid. [failure to instruct on multiple elements was harmless].)