Is it proper to give trespass instructions when a defendant claims he shot the victim in self-defense?

It is proper to give trespass instructions when a defendant claims self-defense or imperfect self-defense, if there is substantial evidence to support a finding that the defendant was a trespasser. For instance, in People v. Hardin (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 625, the defendant was convicted of second degree murder after he ran into the victim's house and killed her with a hammer. The defendant claimed that after he had entered the victim's house, she had initiated the force by coming at him with a hammer. (Id. at pp. 631-632.) On appeal, the defendant complained that the jury had been allowed to find that, by trespassing, he had created the circumstances justifying the victim's use of deadly force. (Id. at p. 634.) The appellate court found no error, explaining: "The entire situation was created by defendant. [The victim's] use of force was privileged; defendant's was not." (Ibid.; see also People v. Watie (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 866, 878 [proper to give trespass instructions where the defendant claimed he shot the victim in self-defense because jury could have found that the victim "had a right to use force to defend himself in his home"].)