What is the test for a defendant's right of self-defense?

^16. Defendant also cites People v. Quatch (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 294, 301, but with no explanation of its relevance beyond a "[s]ee also" signal and the parenthetical precis, "conviction reversed where trial court failed to instruct that defendant could reasonably react to sudden and perilous counterassault."

^17. In Fraguglia the rule is stated as follows: " 'The law does not permit any person to voluntarily seek or invite a combat, or to put himself in the way of being assaulted, with the purpose that he may have a pretext to injure his assailant. The right of self-defense does not imply the right of attack, and it will not avail in any case where the difficulty is set off and induced by the party, by any wilful act of his, or where he voluntarily and of his own free will enters into it. The necessity being of his own creation, will not operate to excuse him.' " (Fraguglia v. Sala, supra, 17 Cal.App.2d at p. 743.)