What is the test for a defense of imperfect self-defense?

defense is inconsistent with the defendant's theory of the case [citation]. In determining whether the evidence is sufficient to warrant a jury instruction, the trial court does not determine the credibility of the defense evidence, but only whether 'there was evidence which, if believed by the jury, was sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt.' [Citations.]" (People v. Salas (2006) 37 Cal.4th 967, 982-983.)

Similarly, a trial court must instruct on a lesser included offense such as imperfect self-defense " 'when the evidence raises a question as to whether all the elements of the charged offense are present. . . . [] Nevertheless, "the existence of 'any evidence, no matter how weak' will not justify instructions on a lesser included offense . . . ." [Citations.] Such instructions are required only where there is "substantial evidence" from which a rational jury could conclude that the defendant committed the lesser offense, and that he is not guilty of the greater offense. [Citations.] 'Substantial evidence,' in this context, 'is evidence sufficient to "deserve consideration by the jury," that is, evidence that a reasonable jury could find persuasive.' [Citation.]" (People v. Williams (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1244, 1263.)