What is the legal test for instructing a jury on voluntary manslaughter in a homicide case?

" ' "It is settled that in criminal cases, even in the absence of a request, the trial court must instruct on the general principles of law relevant to the issues raised by the evidence." ' " (People v. Breverman (1998) 19 Cal.4th 142, 154.) That obligation includes " 'giving instructions on lesser included offenses when the evidence raises a question as to whether all of the elements of the charged offense were present' " and there is substantial evidence to support the lesser included offense. (Ibid.) "In a homicide case, the trial court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on voluntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of murder whenever there is evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that a manslaughter, but not a murder, was committed. [Citation.] This duty includes instruction on voluntary manslaughter due to a sudden quarrel or heat of passion when there is substantial evidence that shows such a theory is relevant." (People v. Thomas (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 630, 643.) Moreover, "[h]eat of passion manslaughter is a lesser included offense of murder . . . because it negates the element of malice" and thus, where provocation is properly presented in a murder case, the failure to instruct the

Page 14