What are some cases where the court instructed the jury on justifiable homicide in self-defense?

Appellant also relies on People v. Villanueva (2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 41, which was not a misdemeanor manslaughter case per se. The main issue in that case was whether the evidence warranted instructions on excusable homicide, when the defendant testified he exhibited a gun in self-defense and the gun discharged accidentally. (Id. at pp. 48-49.) In an aside, the court noted that when a person lawfully brandishes a weapon in self-defense, but does so in a criminally negligent manner, an accidental killing is involuntary manslaughter, not excusable homicide. (Id. at p. 55, fn. 12.) This aside was consistent with the second theory of involuntary manslaughter codified in section 192 (not a misdemeanor manslaughter theory) a killing "in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and circumspection." Villaneuva also does not assist appellant because, as discussed, his testimony foreclosed a theory that he was merely brandishing a weapon and his weapon accidentally wounded the victim. We note, moreover, that the court instructed the jury on justifiable homicide in self-defense. The jury rejected that theory. Thus, it necessarily decided that appellant was not lawfully defending himself, and any assumed error in not instructing on "lawful act" involuntary manslaughter was harmless. (People v. Lewis, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 646 ["Error in failing to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense is harmless when the jury necessarily decides the factual questions posed by the omitted instructions adversely to defendant under other properly given instructions"].)

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.