What is the test for instructing the trial court on a self-defense defense?

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.) This duty extends to defenses that are not inconsistent with the defendant's theory of the case.

Page 4

(People v. Montoya (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1027, 1047.) The court is not required to instruct on a defense unsupported by substantial evidence. (People v. Petznick (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 663, 677 [test is whether evidence from which a jury composed of reasonable people could have concluded specific facts supported the instruction]; People v. Moore (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1105, 1116.)

Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of any other person, draws or exhibits any deadly weapon in a rude, angry or threatening manner is guilty of brandishing. ( 417, subd. (a); see also subd. (c) [drawing or exhibiting loaded or unloaded firearm in a rude, angry or threatening manner]; People v. Sanders (1995) 11 Cal.4th 475, 542 [weapon need not be directly pointed at the victim].)

A self-defense instruction is required where there is substantial evidence the defendant reasonably believed he was in imminent danger of suffering bodily injury or of being touched unlawfully, he reasonably believed immediate use of force was necessary to defend against the danger, and he used no more force than reasonably necessary. (See People v. Humphrey (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1073, 1082-1083; CALCRIM No. 3470.)