WPC- V(cpwد :aG y)HCm =Z*u @q` RE0P.Y?}gmYQW+JE?ϞٓоQ(w,Ro~|$~C;aj74;6@sp Ŝ4Xԫ੶fקkÈ#s^YRwˁw@~-V=deH 7d<@i y*|U<m[#!3 +(}'n>"mC.- 6<9oݫ}<=q:@`sv"Aq/_gV$dY{ՏXyk /1y}ws8sYjh5_ R2 5,'2+l OcmfiWp9%A+!鳳sh4ݕ/ XZE g\/ݱCi༃:Ɗqe9Dȳ}~#!UKN %S 0(Y ^ w@ 4   m f U.No N M M M 01 0= 09 0> 0? 0  0 0aq 0 0 09: 0s 02O 0 0:} 0 0_< 0  0k 0 B* D3 C4 D+N 0y 0@ 06' 0] 0:e 0h 0FU6MU>U*MMMM/t* "M"M"M"M"M"M" "M"M"M"M"M"M"M"M"M#M#M#M # 0# 0C# $$M:$M>$MB$MF$MJ$MN$ BR$Mo$ 0Ds$M$M$ 0K$ %M% %M% 0D%M2&M6&M:&M>&MB&MF&MJ&MN&MR&MV&Z&/*/+D+/++ ,M,<, ,/-------- A4-HP LaserJet 4,,,,0(hH  Z6Times New Roman RegularX($8 99D9U9U9D99[9I99D[8@0 +YCorel3|x9!U CrandellHeckerQuachSailleBarraza(hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular0.Normal<:Definition T<GD:Definition L , ;1` hp x (#;  8.` hp x (#886Definition('z&H1      XXX(o&H2  XXX(o&H3  XXX(&H4 XXX XXX(o&H5  XXX(o&H6  XXX20Address8SP6Blockquote , , ;1` hp x (#;   8.` hp x (#8,*CITE,dl*CODEK0<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS1\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis6&)4Hyperlink            <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K0<6X9`(Courier NewK XXXS1\  `&Times New RomanS<:Preformatted/%  ,Kk (#/K0<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS1\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk (#/<:zBottom of I&'4$ ** ddI  B    ?2%2A`Arial?9('*  dd9  XXXS1\  `&Times New RomanS  &0 d d%%%%'dxddd'dxd<:zTop of ForI&'4$** ddI  B    ?2%2A`Arial?9('*  dd9  XXXS1\  `&Times New RomanS  0Kl.SampleK0<6X9`(Courier NewKS1\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK0<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS1\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable:8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  <6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial8 !jgJonathan . j `&  _ X9iXXX  X X9i;butsee#  +#  People#  ƙ#  Ԁv._Bridgehouse_(1956)47#  #  Cal.2d#  `#  Ԁ406,414;#  ƨ#  People#  #  Ԁv.Wilson(1967)66  #  @#  Cal.2d#  Ʈ#  Ԁ749,761762.)#  ##X[XJ#3052-6907051-12(*2$ !    XX   `   0  ($    3061-325 d(3$ !  ( $ Figure  1  Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 53056-900(3$ !    `&  _XX X Note:TheissueofMatthewsv.UnitedStateswaswhetherafederalcourtis  requiredtoinstructontheaffirmativedefenseofentrapmentunderFederalRulesofCriminalProcedurewhenthedefendantalsoclaimshedidnotcommittheact.WhileMatthewsisfrequentlycitedasfederalauthorityrequiringinstructionswhenthereis  sufficientevidenceforthejurytofindthedefensetobetrue,thedecisionwasnotbasedontheUnitedStatesConstitution.(Cf. Gilmorev.Taylor(1993)508U.S.333,343  344[failurebyastatecourttogiveaffirmativedefensenotafederalquestionbecauseitispurelyanissueofstatelaw].)# [#An affirmativedefenseisonethatdoesnotnegatea  primafacieelementbutinsteadpresentsnewmatterstoexcuseorjustifytheconduct.(Peoplev.Noble(2002)100Cal.App.4th184,189.)   #X X+#k*jgJonathan .n 6%jgJonathan . `&  _XX(Id.,atp.679.)#X[X+#p 7 jgJonathan . `&  _XX(Id.,atp.674,someitalicsomitted.)#X[X+#7051-27 2 `&  _discuss7051-13s #8jgJonathan . \X[( I&mage <=8C HKKKK !  _8 XXdd8XX  9 9DEFENSETHEORIESANDINSTRUCTIONS9 9  92008SDAPSpringAppellateSeminar9999999  999999ByJonathanGrossman_99+99999999_RIGHTTOPRESENTADEFENSE""J(#.%3  SUASPONTERESPONSIBILITYTOINSTRUCTONDEFENSES""J(#.=3   JUSTIFIABLEUSEOFFORCE""J(#.88#4   ̚  PerfectSelfDefense""J(#.NN$4     ImperfectSelfDefense""J(#.00&8     DefenseofOthersL"L"I(#.p p !10    DefenseofPropertyL"L"I(#.#11  DURESSANDNECESSITYL"L"I(#.12    DuressL"L"I(#. 12    NecessityL"L"I(#. 14  MENTALSTATEDEFENSESL"L"I(#. 15    MistakeL"L"I(#. 15    IntoxicationL"L"I(#.\ \ 19     UnconsciousnessL"L"I(#.  20 "   ImpairmentL"L"I(#.. . 21 $  ENTRAPMENTL"L"I(#. 22 &""   ThePrincipleL"L"I(#. 22 ($$   StateLawL"L"I(#. 22 *&&  +''   VariationsoftheEntrapmentDefenseL"L"I(#.""424  MISCELLANEOUSDEFENSESL"L"I(#.xx!25    AccidentL"L"I(#.P P 25    AlibiL"L"I(#.26     CharacterDefenseL"L"I(#. !27     ClaimofRightL"L"I(#.X X 27     ConsentL"L"I(#. 2989999     DisciplineofaChildL"L"I(#.\\%29    MedicalMarijuanaL"L"I(#. !29    TransitoryPossessionL"L"I(#.%30  PREJUDICIALERRORL"L"I(#.^ ^ 31    &""   RIGHTTOPRESENTADEFENSEu     WhetherrooteddirectlyintheDueProcessClauseoftheFourteenthAmendment[citation],orintheCompulsoryProcessorConfrontationClauseoftheSixthAmendment[citation],theConstitutionguaranteescriminaldefendantsameaningfulopportunitytopresentacompletedefense.[Citations.](Cranev.Kentucky(1986)476U.S.683,690.)     SUASPONTERESPONSIBILITYTOINSTRUCTONDEFENSESG 8   ` Itisfarworsetoconvictaninnocentmanthantoletaguiltymangofree.(InreWinship(1970)397U.S.358,372(conc.opn.ofHarlan,J.),   citedinRosev.Clark(1986)478U.S.570,580;seealsoInre_Sodersten_   (2007)146 Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ1163,1219,fn.35,quotingBlackstone.)    l P   Itiswellsettledthatadefendanthasarighttohavethetrialcourt,onitsowninitiative,giveajuryinstructiononanyaffirmativedefenseforwhichtherecordcontainssubstantialevidence(Peoplev.Michaels(2002)28Cal.4th486,529)!evidencesufficient P forareasonablejurytofindinfavorofthedefendant(Matthewsv.UnitedStates(1988)485 P U.S.58,63)!unlessthedefenseisinconsistentwiththedefendantstheoryofthecase P [citation].Indeterminingwhethertheevidenceissufficienttowarrantajuryinstruction,thetrialcourtdoesnotdeterminethecredibilityofthedefenseevidence,butonlywhether P  therewasevidencewhich,ifbelievedbythejury,wassufficienttoraiseareasonabledoubt.' P! [Citations.](Peoplev.Salas(2006)37Cal.4th967,982.) P"   Evenifitdoesnotinspireconfidence,adefendantstestimonyconstitutessubstantialevidence.( People# #Ԁv.Webster(1991)54Cal.3d411,443; People# c#Ԁv._Melton_(1988)44Cal.3d P% 713,746.)(Peoplev.MejiaLenares(2006)135Cal.App.4th1437,1446.) P&   Thedefensehastherighttoinstructionsoninconsistentdefenseonrequestbutnotoverdefendantsobjection.(Peoplev.Atchison(1978)22Cal.3d181,183;Peoplev. !P)  Sedeno(1974)10Cal.3d703,717,fn.7;Peoplev.DePlane(1979)88Cal.App.3d223,248; "P*! seeMatthewv.UnitedStates(1988)485U.S.58,6364[relyingonFederalRulesof #P+" CriminalProcedure].)  Butthecourthasnosuaspontedutytogiveclarifyingorlimitinginstruction.Ϛ Generally,apartymaynotcomplainonappealthataninstructioncorrectinlawwastoogeneralorincompleteunlessthepartyhasrequestedappropriateclarifyingoramplifyinglanguage.(Peoplev.Hudson(2006)38 Cal.4th# ؀#Ԁ1002,10111012;Peoplev.Saille(1991) )P1( 54Cal.3d1103,1119.) +P3*   Althoughthereareexceptions,mostdefensesinCaliforniaonlyrequirethedefendanttoraiseareasonabledoubt.(Peoplev.Mower(2002)28Cal.4th457,477480.)Itiserror  toinstructsuchadefensemustbeprovenbyapreponderanceoftheevidence.(See,e.g.,  People#  Ƒ#Ԁv.Costello(1943)21Cal.2d760,763.)     @ JUSTIFIABLEUSEOFFORCEPERFECTSELFDEFENSE   ` Extremisminthedefenseoflibertyisnovice.!BarryGoldwater     Homicideisalsojustifiablewhencommittedbyanypersoninanyofthefollowingcases:[]1.Whenresistinganyattempttomurderanyperson,ortocommitafelony,ortodosomegreatbodilyinjuryuponanyperson;or,[]  ...#  #Ԁ[]3.Whencommittedinthelawful   defenseofsuchperson,  ...#  ~#Ԁbutsuchperson,  ...#  #Ԁifhewastheassailantorengagedinmutual  combat,mustreallyandingoodfaithhaveendeavoredtodeclineanyfurtherstrugglebeforethehomicidewascommitted.  (Pen.Code,#  #Ԁ197.) Abarefearofthecommissionofany  oftheoffensesmentionedinsubdivision[]  ...#  ơ#Ԁ3ofSection197,topreventwhichhomicide  maybelawfullycommitted,isnotsufficienttojustifyit.Butthecircumstancesmustbesufficienttoexcitethefearsofareasonableperson,andthepartykillingmusthaveactedundertheinfluenceofsuchfearsalone.  (Pen.Code,#   #Ԁ198.)     Lawfulresistencetothecommissionofapublicoffensemaybemade:[]1.Bythepartyabouttobeinjured.  (Pen.Code,#  !#Ԁ692.) Resistancesufficienttopreventtheoffense  maybemadebythepartyabouttobeinjured:[]1.Topreventanoffenseagainsthisperson  ...#  "#Ԁ.  (Pen.Code,#  Y"#Ԁ693.)    "Anynecessaryforcemaybeusedtoprotectfromwrongfulinjurythepersonorpropertyofoneself...."(Civ.Code,50.)   Batteryisdefinedasanunlawfuloffensivetouching,homicideasanunlawfulkilling,andresistingarrestasinterferingwiththeofficer'slawfulperformanceoftheirduties.Thus,selfdefenseattacksanelementtheprosecutionmustproveifthedefendantraisesitasanissue.Consequently,thedefendanthastheburdenonlyofraisingareasonabledoubt.(Peoplev.Banks(1976)67Cal.App.3d379,383384;see_Mullaney_Ԁv.Wilbur(1975)421 &"" U.S.684,701.)Selfdefenseappliestobrandishingaweapon.(Peoplev.Kirk(1986)192 '## Cal.App.3dSupp.15,19.)Afelonmaypossessafirearmwheninimminentdangerofharmandtherearenoreasonablealternatives.(Peoplev.King(1978)22Cal.3d12,2426.) )%%   Thecourthasasuaspontedutytogivetheinstructionifthereissufficientevidence +'' anditisnotinconsistentwiththedefensecase.(Peoplev._Lemus_(1988)203Cal.App.3d  470,478.)Iftheinstructionisinconsistentwiththedefensetheory,theinstructionmaybegivenonlyifrequestedbythedefendant.(Peoplev._Elize_(1999)71Cal.App.4th605,611  615.)Thedefendantneednottestify. [_S]ubstantial_Ԁevidenceofadefendantsstateofmindmaybefoundinthetestimonyofwitnessesotherthanthedefendant.(Peoplev.Hill(2005)  131  Cal.App.4th#  ƹ)#Ԁ1089,1102;accord,  People#  *#Ԁv.DeLeon(1992)10  Cal.App.#  *#4th815,824.)     Lawfulselfdefenseexistswhen(1)thedefendantreasonablybelievesthatheorsheisinimminentdangerofsufferingabattery,(2)thedefendantreasonablybelievesthattheimmediateuseofforceisnecessarytodefendagainstthatdanger,and(3)thedefendantusesnomoreforcethanisreasonablynecessarytodefendagainstthatdanger.(Peoplev.   Humphrey(1996)13Cal.4th1073,10821083;seeCALCRIMNos.505,3470.)     Thefirstelementtotheselfdefenseclaimconsistsoftwocomponents:anhonest,subjectivefearofimminentperilandthefearisobjectivelyreasonable.(Peoplev.  Humphrey(1996)13Cal.4th1073,1082.)Theimminentdangerneednotbereal,solong  asareasonablepersonwouldbelieveittobereal.  (Ibid.;#  G.#Ԁ  People#  ƚ.#Ԁv.Clark(1982)130  Cal.App.3d371,377.)Whatisreasonableisviewedfromareasonablepersoninthedefendant'sposition. Althoughthebeliefintheneedtodefendmustbeobjectivelyreasonable,ajurymustconsiderwhatwouldappeartobenecessarytoareasonableperson  inasimilarsituationandwithsimilarknowledge....'[Citation.]Itjudgesreasonableness  fromthepointofviewofareasonablepersoninthepositionofdefendant....'[Citation.]  Todothis,itmustconsiderallthe'"factsandcircumstances...indeterminingwhether  thedefendantactedinamannerinwhichareasonablemanwouldactinprotectinghisownlifeorbodilysafety.'"'[Citation.]Aswestatedlongago,...adefendantisentitledto  haveajurytakeintoconsiderationalltheelementsinthecasewhichmightbeexpectedtooperateonhismind....'[Citation.]  (Id.atpp.#  2#Ԁ10821083;seealso  Peoplev._Minifie_  (1996)13Cal.4th1055,#  [3#Ԁ1068;  People#  4#Ԁv.Spencer(1996)51Cal.App.4th1208,12201221;  butsee  People#  Ƥ4#Ԁv.Jefferson(2004)119Cal.App.4th508,519[thereasonablepersonstandard   doesnotchangetoaccountforthedefendant'smentalillness].)  TheX[XCALCRIM#XX[5#instructionstatesthedefendantmustbeinimminentdangerof # suffering bodilyinjury,butreasonableforceispermissibleagainstanybattery,evenifitisonlyanoffensivetouching.(Peoplev.Myers(1998)61Cal.App.4th328,335.) %!!   Animminentdangerisonethatmustbedealtwithinstantly.(InreChristianS. '## (1994)7Cal.4th468,483;Peoplev._Aris_(1989)215Cal.App.3d1178,11861188, ($$ overruledonothergroundsin  People#  78#Ԁv.Humphrey(1996)13Cal.4th1073,1089.) )%%   Antecedentthreats:Thedefendantisjustifiedintakingquickerorharsheraction +'' whenheorsheisawareofthreatsagainstthedefendantorothers,orpastviolencebythevictim.(Peoplev._Minifie_  (1996)13Cal.4th1055,#  9#Ԁ1065;  People#  >:#Ԁv.Moore(1954)43Cal.2d  517,528;  People#  :#Ԁv.Pena(1984)151Cal.App.3d462,475[itwassufficientthatthe  defendanthonestlybelievedthevictimmadethethreats,thoughthevictimneverdid];seealso  People#  ;#Ԁv.Gonzales(1992)8Cal.4th1658,1664;  People#  C<#Ԁv.Bush(1978)84Cal.App.3d  294,302304;Peoplev.Torres(1949)94Cal.App.2d146,151153.)Thecourtshaveheld   thereisnotasuaspontedutytoinstructonantecedentthreats,thoughsuchaninstructionmustbegivenuponrequest.(Peoplev._Garvin_(2003)110Cal.App.4th484,488.)An   antecedentthreatinstructionisnowintegratedintoX[XCALCRIMNos.#XX[T>#Ԁ505and3470asan   optionalinstruction.  InCalifornia,thereisnorequirementthatthedefendantretreat.(Peoplev.Hughes   (1951)107Cal.App.2d487,494;  People#  ƀ?#Ԁv._Hatchett_(1942)56Cal.App.2d20,22.)       CALJICNo.#  7@#Ԁ5.55, therightofselfdefenseisnotavailableinthefirstplace toa  personwhoseeksaquarrelwiththeintenttocreatearealorapparentnecessityofexercisingselfdefense.Theinstructionsappeartobecorrectifreadnarrowly:adefendantcannot contrive[]selfdefensebyprovokingthevictimtorespondwithforce.(  People#  B#Ԁv.Holt  (1914)25Cal.2d59,6566.)The  instructions,however,arequitevagueinnotdescribing  whataquarrelwas.Forexample,CALJICNo.#  ƊB#Ԁ5.17statedtheimperfectselfdefense   principleisnotavailable,andmaliceaforethoughtisnotnegated,ifthedefendantbyhisunlawfulorwrongfulconductcreatedthecircumstanceswhichlegallyjustifiedhisadversary'suseofforce,attackorpursuit.  Thishascausedsomecourtsandprosecutorsto  concludethedefendantcannotinvokeselfdefensewhenthevictimrespondedtosomewrongdoingbythedefendant,howeverslight.(See#  fD#Peoplev._Seaton_(2001)26Cal.4th598,  664;InreChristianS.(1994)7Cal.4th768,773,fn.1;seealso  People#  F#Ԁv._Hardin_(2000)  85  Cal.App.4th#  ƴF#Ԁ625,634[imperfectselfdefensedidnotapplytoadefendantwhohad  enteredanothershomewithoutconsent].)  Underthelaw,#  ƊG#however,ifonepeaceablystarts  aconfrontationorcommitsawrong,the victimcannotrespondwithunreasonableforce.Ifunreasonableforceistheresponse,thedefendanthasarighttoselfdefense.(Peoplev. ! Crandell(1988)46Cal.3d833,871-872;Peoplev.Quach(2004)116Cal.App.4th294, " 301-302.)X[XCALCRIMNo.#XX[aI#Ԁ3472morenarrowlystatesa persondoesnothaverighttoself # defenseifheorsheprovokesafightorquarrelwiththeintenttocreateanexcusetouseforce.    Similarly,CALJICNos.#  {J#Ԁ5.54and5.56requirethedefendanttoengageinseveral '## stepsinordertoclaimselfdefensewhenhehas initiatedanassaultor engagedinmutualcombat.Itincludesanattempttoactuallystopfighting,tellingtheopponenthewantstostopfighting,andgivetheopponentanopportunitytostopfighting.(  CALJICNos.#  0L#  Ԁ5.54, *&& 5.56; X9iX  CALCRIMNo.#  X X9iL#Ԁ3471.)Theinstructionsderivefrom#  }L#  PenalCodesection#  SM#  Ԁ197which +'' statesforonewhoisan assailantorengagedinmutualcombattobejustifiedinahomicide,heorshe mustreallyandingoodfaithhaveendeavoredtodeclineanyfurtherstruggle.#  ƧM#Thelawdoesnotrequireanassailanttoengageinamultistepprocesstoendthe  fightinordertoinvokeselfdefense,solongasheorsheclearlytriestowithdrawfromthefight.Further, [_a]n_Ԁaggressorusing_nondeadly_Ԁforce...whomeetsthedeadlyforceinresponse,isnotrequiredtocommunicateanintenttowithdraw....(Peoplev.Crandell   (1988)46Cal.3d833,871-872;Peoplev.Hecker(1895)109Cal.451,464;Peoplev.   Quach(2004)116Cal.App.4th294,301-302[aboutevery40yearsthecourtssaythe   instructionisillegalandthentheinstructionresurfacesagain];Peoplev._Gleghorn_(1987)   193Cal.App.3d196,201;Peoplev.Sawyer(1967)256Cal.App.2d66,75,fn.2;contra     People#  ƚR#Ԁv._Shelmire_(2005)130Cal.App.4th1044,10551056;  People#  =S#Ԁv.Nem(2003)114   Cal.App.4th160,165167.)Newerversionsof  CALJICNos.5.54and5.56explainthatif   thevictimtoasimpleassaultrespondswithunreasonabledeadlyforce,thedefendant#  S#may   usereasonableforceinselfdefense.Finally,justbecauseadefendantandanotherarefightingeachotherdoesnotmeantheyhave engagedinmutualcombat.TheSixthDistrictrecentlyheldthat mutualcombatoccursonlywhenthereisanarrangedorconsensualfight.uP(Peoplev.Ross(2007)155Cal.App.4th1033,relyingon  People#  CV#Ԁv.Fowler(1918) P 178Cal.657,671;  People#  V#Ԁv._Jecker_Ԁ(1895)109Cal.451,462;  People#  ]W#Ԁv.Rogers(1958)164 P Cal.App.2d555,557.)    CALJICNo.#  W#Ԁ5.12states,inpart,thattherighttoselfdefenseapplieswhenthe P defendantactuallyandreasonablybelievesheorsheisinimminentdangerofdeathorgreatbodilyinjury,inwhichcasethedefendantmayusedeadlyforceifheorshe _act[ed_]undertheinfluenceofsuchfearsalone.  CALJICNo.#  ƠY#  Ԁ5.12derivesfromsection#  Y#  Ԁ198whichstates, P inpart, thepartykillingmusthaveactedundertheinfluenceofsuchfearsalone.(People P v.Flannel(1979)25Cal.3d668,674675.)Asthecourt#  HZ#observedinPeoplev._Trevino_ P (1988)200Cal.App.3d874,879, aninstructionwhichstatesthatthepartykillingmustactundertheinfluenceofsuchfearsalone,isacorrectstatementofthelaw.[Citations.][]Insoholding,wedonotmeantoimplythatapersonwhofeelsangerorevenhatredtowardthepersonkilled,mayneverjustifiablyusedeadlyforceinselfdefense.  (Id.atp.#  3]#Ԁ879.) it !P  wouldbeunreasonabletorequireanabsenceofanyfeelingotherthanfear,beforethehomicidecouldbeconsideredjustifiable.Sucharequirementisnotapartofthelaw,norisitapartofCALJICNo.5.12.Instead,thelawrequiresthatthepartykillingactoutoffearalone.  (Ibid.)#  ^#ԀTheFlannelcaseitselfconcernedadefendantwhowasinafeudwiththe %P#$ victimandapproachedthevictimwithagun.(Flannel,supra,atp.  673674,679680.)#  _# &P$%   Adefendantcanusedeadlyforceonlyifheorsheisreasonablyinfearofgreatbodilyinjury.(See  People#  ƨ`#Ԁv._Ceballos_(1974)12Cal.3d470,477479.) )P'(   Thedefendant'srighttouseselfdefenseceaseswhentherenolongerappearstobe +P)* athreat.(Peoplev.Martin(1980)101Cal.App.3d1000,10101011.)    Transferredselfdefense.Adefendantwhousesreasonabledeadlyforcebutaccidentlykillsabystanderisnotguiltyofthehomicide.(Peoplev.Matthews(1979)91  Cal.App.3d1018,1024;seealso  People#  c#Ԁv.Curtis(1994)30Cal.App.4th1337,1257.)But  thereisnosuasponteresponsibilitytoinstructonthisprinciple.  (Id.atp.#  c#Ԁ1025.)     Thereisarighttousereasonableforcetodefendagainstanattackinganimal.Inarecentcase,aretiredsheriffdeputyshotattwo kneehighunleasheddogsthatappearedtobeathreat.Thedefendantwaschargedwithrecklesslydischargingafirearmandattemptedcrueltytoananimal.Thedefendant'sreasonableapprehensionwasadefensetothecharges.(Peoplev.Lee(2005)131Cal.App.4th1413,14261429.)   IMPERFECTSELFDEFENSE   ` Violenceisthelastrefugeoftheincompetent.!IsaacAsimov  ̚  Itisthehonestbeliefofimminentperilthatnegatesmaliceinacaseofcomplete  selfdefense;thereasonablenessofthebeliefsimplygoestothejustificationforthekilling.'π[mdCitation.]WeconcludedthatAnhonestbutunreasonablebeliefthatitisnecessaryto d defendoneselffromimminentperiltolifeorgreatbodilyinjurynegatesmaliceaforethought,thementalelementnecessaryformurder,sothatthechargeableoffenseisreducedtomanslaughter.'[Citation.od](InreChristianS.(1994)7Cal.4th768,773,quoting    People#  ri#Ԁv.Flannel(1979)25Cal.3d668,674,679,emphasisomitted;seealso  People#  j#Ԁv.  _Viramantes_(2001)93Cal.App.4th1256,12621263[thesubjectiveelementsarethesame  asforperfectselfdefense];  People#  k#Ԁv._Blakeley_(2000)23Cal.4th82;X[XCALCRIMNo.#XX[k#Ԁ571;    CALJICNo.#  l#Ԁ5.17.)     Whenthedefenseofimperfectselfdefensewasdeveloped,theprinciplewasthatadefendantactingwithanhonestthoughunreasonablefearlacksmalice,soheorsheisnotguiltyofmurder.Suchanhonestbutunreasonablefear,however,doesnotnegatethespecificintenttokill,soheisguiltyofthelesserincludedoffenseofvoluntarymanslaughter.TheCaliforniaSupremeCourthasstatedthat becausemaliceisastatutoryrequirementforamurderconviction(Pen.Code,187,subd.(a)),thestatuterequiredcourtstodeterminewhetheranactualbutunreasonablebeliefintheimminentneedforselfdefenserosetothelevelofmalicewithinthestatutorydefinition.(InreChristianS.(1994)7 '') Cal.4th768,773774.)Butrecently,thecourthasviewedimperfectselfdefenseasajudiciallycreatedcrime,stating unreasonableselfdefense'is...notatruedefense;ratheritisashorthanddescriptionofoneformofvoluntarymanslaughter.Andvoluntarymanslaughter,whetheritarisesfromunreasonableselfdefenseorfromakillingduringa ++- suddenquarrelorheatofpassion,isnotadefensebutacrime;% q %q/qmoreprecisely,itisalesseroffenseincludedinthecrimeofmurder.(Peoplev.Barton(1995)12Cal.4th186,200  201.)  Imperfectselfdefensecanapplywhenakillingisprovokedasaresultofbatteredwomen'ssyndrome.(  People#  `r#Ԁv.Humphrey(1996)13Cal.4th1073,10821086.)     Imperfectselfdefensedoesnotapplywhenthedefendanthonestlybutunreasonablyperceivesaneedforselfdefenseduetointoxicationordiminishedcapacity.(Peoplev.   _Mejia_Ԅ_Lenares_(2006)135Cal.App.4th1437,14441446[delusions];  People#  It#Ԁv.Jefferson   (2004)119Cal.App.4th508,519[diminishedcapacitycannolongerreducemurdertomanslaughter];  People#  u#Ԁv._Padilla_(2002)103Cal.App.4th675,678[hallucinations].)Justice   Brownexplainedthatintoxicationcanhavetwoeffects.Itcancauseonenottoperceivearealrisk,asiscommonwithalcoholabuse,oritcancauseonetoperceiveariskthatisnotreal,asiscommonwithcocaineormethamphetamineabuse.Inthefirstsituation,expressmalice,butnotimpliedmalice,isnotrebuttedbyvoluntaryintoxication.Shestateditshouldnotbeusedtoreducemurdertovoluntarymanslaughterinthesecondsituation.(Peoplev.  Wright(2005)35  Cal.4th#  w#Ԁ964,985986(conc.opn.ofBrown,J.).)    Imperfectselfdefensedoesnotapplytofelonymurder.(Peoplev.Robertson(2004)  34  Cal.4th#  x#Ԁ156,164166;  People#  Jy#Ԁv._Tabios_(1998)67  Cal.App.4th#  y#Ԁ1,69.)    Imperfectselfdefenseappliestoattemptedmurder.(SeeCALCRIMNo.604.)  Thetheoryofimperfectselfdefensehasnotbeenwellreceivedasadefensetoanyothercrime,buttheissueisnotforeclosed.Itmightapplytomayhem.(See  People#  A{#Ԁv.  _McKelvy_(1987)194  Cal.App.3d#  {#Ԁ694,704(leadopn.ofKline,J.)[acceptingitasadefense];  contra  People#  Ƈ|#Ԁv._Quintero_(2006)135  Cal.App.4th#  }#Ԁ1152,1166;  People#  g}#Ԁv.Hayes(2004)120    Cal.App.4th#  }#Ԁ796,801805[6DCAsaysitdoesnotapply];  People#  X~#Ԁv._Sekona_(1994)23     Cal.App.4th#  ~#Ԁ443,457;seealso  People#  P#Ԁv._Michaels_(2002)28  Cal.4th#  #  Ԁ486,530[notingthat ! caseshaveonlyheldthereisnosuaspontedutytoinstructonimperfectselfdefenseformayhem];#  #  People#  #Ԁv.Vital(1996)45  Cal.App.4th#  N#  Ԁ441,446.)#  ƛ# #   Itdoesnotapplytoshootingintoaresidenceoroccupiedvehicle(withanenhancementunder  Pen.Code,#  h#Ԁ12022.53,subd.(d)),evenwhenthejuryfindsthe &"" defendantguiltyonlyofvoluntarymanslaughter.(Peoplev.Waite(2002)100  Cal.App.4th#  U# '## 866,882.)  Thecourtshouldinstructonimperfectselfdefensewheneveritinstructsonperfectselfdefensesincetheonlydistinctioniswhetherdefendant'sbeliefintheneedtoprotect +'' himselfisnotreasonable.(Peoplev._Ceja_(1994)26Cal.App.4th78,8586,overruledon  othergroundsin  People#  =#Ԁv.Blakely(2000)23Cal.4th82,91;  People#  Ʊ#Ԁv.DeLeon(1992)10    Cal.App.4th#  &#Ԁ815,824;butsee  People#  Ɖ#Ԁv.Hill(2005)131  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ1089,11011102  [failuretoinstructonperfectselfdefensewasnoterrorbecausetherewasinsufficientevidencetoinstructonimperfectselfdefense];  People#  #Ԁv.Rodriguez(1992)53Cal.App.4th  1250,12731275;_Menendez_Ԁv._Terhune_  (9thCir.#  ؈#Ԁ2005)422F.3d1021,1030.)   DEFENSEOFOTHERS8   ` Violencecanonlybeconcealedbyalie,andtheliecanonlybemaintainedbyviolence.!_Aleksandr_ԀSolzhenitsyn      Homicideisalsojustifiablewhencommittedbyanypersoninanyofthefollowingcases:[]  ...#  Ư#Ԁ[]2.Whencommittedindefenseof  ...#  #Ԁperson  ...#  m#Ԁ.3.Whencommitted   inthelawfuldefenseofsuchperson,orofawifeorhusband,parent,child,master,mistress,orservantofsuchperson,whenthereisreasonablegroundtoapprehendadesigntocommitafelonyortodosomegreatbodilyinjury,andimminentdangerofsuchdesignbeingaccomplished;butsuchperson,orthepersoninwhosebehalfthedefensewasmade,ifhewastheassailantorengagedinmutualcombat,mustreallyandingoodfaithhaveendeavoredtodeclineanyfurtherstrugglebeforethehomicidewascommitted.  (Pen.  Code,#  #Ԁ197.) Abarefearofthecommissionofanyoftheoffensesmentionedin  subdivisions2and3ofSection197,topreventwhichhomicidemaybelawfullycommitted,isnotsufficienttojustifyit.Butthecircumstancesmustbesufficienttoexcitethefearsofareasonableperson,andthepartykillingmusthaveactedundertheinfluenceofsuchfearsalone.  (Pen.Code,#  ݏ#Ԁ198.)  ̚  Lawfulresistencetothecommissionofapublicoffensemaybemade:[]  ...#  ƨ#Ԁ[]2.  Byotherparties.  (Pen.Code,#  &#Ԁ692.) Resistancesufficienttopreventtheoffensemaybe  madebythepartyabouttobeinjured:[]1.Topreventanoffenseagainsthisperson,orhisfamily,orsomememberthereof.  (Pen.Code,#  O#Ԁ693.) Anyotherperson,inaidordefense ! ofthepersonabouttobeinjured,maymakeresistancesufficienttopreventtheoffense.  (Pen.Code,#  D#Ԁ694.) #   Thereisarighttodefendathirdpersonwhenthedefendantreasonablybelievestheheorsheneedsdefending,evenifthethirdpersonwouldnothavetherighttoinvoketherighttoselfdefense.(Peoplev._Randle_(2005)35  Cal.4th#  Ȕ#Ԁ987,9961001.)Thereisalsoa '## righttoimperfectdefenseofothers.  (Ibid.#  n#;see  People#  ŕ#Ԁv._Uriarte_(1990)223  Cal.App.3d#  G# ($$ 192,198.)  Adefendantwhostartedafightcaninvoketherighttodefendothersafterretreating +'' fromthefight.(Peoplev._Randle_(2005)35  Cal.4th#  ~#Ԁ987,1002.)  DEFENSEOFPROPERTY8   ` Solongasthegreatmajorityofmenarenotdeprivedofeitherpropertyorhonor,theyaresatisfied.!Niccolo_Machiavelli_       Homicideisalsojustifiablewhencommittedbyanypersoninanyofthefollowingcases:[]  ...#  `#Ԁ[]2.Whencommittedindefenseofhabitation,property,orperson,against   onewhomanifestlyintendsorendeavors,byviolenceorsurprise,tocommitafelony,oragainstonewhomanifestlyintendsandendeavors,inaviolent,riotousortumultuousmanner,toenterthehabitationofanotherforthepurposeofofferingviolencetoanypersontherein  ...#  !#Ԁ.  (Pen.Code,#  q#Ԁ197.) h  #s  ̚  Anypersonusingforceintendedorlikelytocausedeathorgreatbodilyinjurywithinhisorherresidenceshallbepresumedtohaveheldareasonablefearofimminentperilofdeathorgreatbodilyinjurytoself,family,oramemberofthehouseholdwhenthatforceisusedagainstanotherperson,notamemberofthefamilyorhousehold,whounlawfullyandforciblyentersorhasunlawfullyandforciblyenteredtheresidenceandthepersonusingtheforcekneworhadreasontobelievethatanunlawfulandforcibleentryoccurred.[]Asusedinthissection,greatbodilyinjurymeansasignificantorsubstantialphysicalinjury.  (Pen.Code,#  ƅ#Ԁ198.5) B   Resistancesufficienttopreventtheoffensemaybemadebythepartyabouttobeinjured:[]  ...#  f#Ԁ[]2.Topreventanillegalattemptbyforcetotakeorinjurepropertyinhis 7 lawfulpossession.  (Pen.Code,#  )#Ԁ693.) N     DefenseofpropertyorhomeinPenalCodesection#  Ƥ#Ԁ197,  subdivision#  #Ԁ2appliesonly |! ifthevictimintendstocommitan atrociouscrimeattemptedtobecommittedbyforce.(Peoplev._Ceballos_Ԁ(1974)12  Cal.3d#  2#Ԁ470,478.)Forcibleandatrociouscrimesarethose # whosecharacterandmannerreasonablycreatefearofdeathorseriousbodilyharm.  (Id.at $  p.#  #Ԁ479.)Murder,mayhem,rape,androbberyqualifyasamatteroflaw.  (Id.atp.#  ģ#Ԁ478.) %(! Burglary,withoutmore,doesnot.  (Id.atp.#  U#Ԁ479.) &?"    Whatfollowedwastheenactmentof  PenalCodesection#  #Ԁ198.5.CalledtheHome )m$" ProtectionBillofRights,itcreatesapresumptionofjustifiedforceagainstatrespasser.(Peoplev._Watie_(2002)100  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ866,878[appliedwhenaresidentwasconfronted K+&$ onthefrontporch];  People#  ƾ#Ԁv._Hardin_(2000)625,633[thereisapresumptionthatdeadly  forcebyaresidentagainstatrespasserwasappropriate];  People#  ƺ#Ԁv.Owen(1991)226    Cal.App.3d#  -#Ԁ996,1005;butsee  People#  Ɛ#Ԁv._Silvey_(1997)58  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ1320,1327[didnot . applytoaguestwhentheresidentsawnoneedtodefendherself];  People#  ̩#Ԁv.Brown(1992) E 6  Cal.App.4th#  >#  Ԁ1489,14961497[didnotapplytoaconfrontationonafrontporch]#  Ƌ#.)  \ CALCRIMNo.506generallyinstructsondefenseofproperty,buttheinstructionforthepresumptioncreatedbysection198.5isfoundatCALCRIMNo.3477.Thereisgenerallyasuaspontedutytoinstructonpresumptions.  (Evid.Code,#  #Ԁ502;Peoplev.Mower(2002) Q  28Cal.4th457,483487;butsee  People#  Ƽ#Ԁv.Owen(1991)226  Cal.App.3d#  #Ԁ996,1005[thejury h  wasotherwiseadequatelyinstructed].)  DURESSANDNECESSITY  Duressneedstobedistinguishedfromnecessity. Commonlawhistorically +  distinguishedbetweenthedefensesofduressandnecessity.Duresswassaidtoexcusecriminalconductwheretheactorwasunderanunlawfulthreatofimminentdeathorseriousbodilyinjury,whichthreatcausedtheactortoengageinconductviolatingtheliteraltermsofthecriminallaw.Whilethedefenseofduresscoveredthesituationwherethecoercionhaditssourceintheactionsofotherhumanbeings,thedefenseofnecessity,orchoiceofevils,traditionallycoveredthesituationwherephysicalforcesbeyondtheactor'scontrolrenderedillegalconductthelesseroftwoevils.Thus,whereAdestroyedadikebecauseBthreatenedtokillhimifhedidnot,Awouldarguethatheactedunder% @ %@*duress,whereasifAdestroyedthedikeinordertoprotectmorevaluablepropertyfrom% ^ %^flooding,Acouldclaimadefenseofnecessity.'(UnitedStatesv.Bailey(1980)444U.S.394,409410.)An  underlyingpremisecommontobothdefensesisiftherewasareasonable,legalalternative ( toviolatingthelaw,'achancebothtorefusetodothecriminalactandalsotoavoidthethreatenedharm,'thedefenseswillfail.'(Id.atp.410.)(Peoplev.Heath(1989)207 !V Cal.App.3d892,899900.)DURESS  Persons(unlessthecrimeispunishablewithdeath)whocommitstheactormadetheomissionchargedunderthreatsormenacesufficestoshowthattheyhadreasonablecausetoanddidbelievetheirliveswouldbeendangerediftheyrefusedarenotguiltyofthecrime.  (Pen.Code,#  ش#Ԁ26,subd.Six.) )%"   Duressforadefendantismorenarrowthanduressforavictim.(  People#  ơ#Ԁv.Leal +<'$ (2004)33  Cal.4th#  #Ԁ999,1009.)Bycomparison,asexoffensebyduressis adirectorimplied  threatofforce,violence,danger,hardship,retribution,tocoerceareasonablepersonofordinarysusceptibilitiesto(1)performanactwhichotherwisewouldnothavebeenperformed,or(2)acquiesceinanacttowhichoneotherwisewouldnothavesubmitted.  (Id.atpp.#  ˷#Ԁ10041005.)  \   Acourthasasuaspontedutytogiveaduressinstructionifsupportedbysubstantialevidenceandisnotinconsistentwiththedefensetheory.(Peoplev.Wilson(2005)36 Q  Cal.4th309,331.)  Thedefenseof duressnegatesanelementofthecrimecharged!theintentor   capacitytocommitthecrime!andthedefendantneedraiseonlyareasonabledoubtthathe   actedintheexerciseofhisfreewill.  ...#  8#ԀThedefendantdoesnothavethetimetoform   criminalintentbecauseofimmediacyandimminencyofthethreatenedharmandneedonlyraiseareasonabledoubtastotheexistenceornonexistenceofthisfact.(Peoplev.Heath B (1989)207Cal.App.3d892,901;  People#  Ʒ#Ԁv.Beach(1987)194Cal.App.3d955,973.)  Y   Therearetwoelementstothedefenseofduress. Thedefendantmust% t %tԀshowthattheactwasdoneundersuchthreatsormenacesthathehad(1)anactualbeliefhislifewasthreatenedand(2)reasonablecauseforsuchbelief.(Heath,supra,207Cal.App.3datp. e 900;accord,  People#  Ƥ#Ԁv.Perez(1973)9Cal.3d651,657;  People#  #Ԁv._Petzenick_(2003)114 | Cal.App.4th663,676677.)  Duressisaneffectivedefenseonlywhentheactorrespondstoanimmediateandimminentdanger.[A]fearoffutureharmtoone'slifedoesnotrelieveoneofresponsibility ( forthecrimeshecommits.'[Citations.](Heath,supra,207Cal.App.3datp.900;accord, ?   People#  #Ԁv.Vieira(2005)35Cal.4th264,289;  Peoplev._Coffman_ԀandMarlow(2004)34 !V Cal.4th1,100;see#  ƒ#  People#  I#  Ԁv.Wilson(2005)36Cal.4th309,331332[duresswas "m unavailablewhenthedefendantwasunawareofthethreattohislife]#  Ƒ#.)Duressappliesifthe 4# defendanthasbeenthreatenedwithimminentgreatbodilyharm.(SeePeoplev.Otis K$ (1959)174Cal.App.2d119,124;UnitedStatesv.Bailey(1980)444U.S.394,409.) b%  Althoughthisisnotreflectedintheinstruction,duressprobablyappliesiftheinstigatorthreatensharmtoanotherperson.(SeeHeath,supra,atp.898,discussing  People#  !#Ԁv.Pena '"  (1983)149Cal.App.3dSupp.14,2125[anecessitydefenseduetothreatstoathirdparty].)Duressdoesnotapplytohardships.(Peoplev.Valentine(2001)93Cal.App.4th1241, )%" 1249.) +<'$   Thedefendant'sfearmustbereasonable.Thereisnotanimperfectduressdefense(anunreasonablebutgoodfaithbeliefinduress).(  People#  #Ԁv._Bacigalupo_(1991)1Cal.4th  103,126,fn.4;Peoplev.Son(2000)79Cal.App.4th224,238240;  People#  #Ԁv.Kearns(1997) . 55Cal.App.4th1128,11351137;Peoplev.King(1991)1Cal.App.4th288,297298; E   People#  #Ԁv.Jacobs(1991)230Cal.App.3d1337,1345.)  \   Duressdoesnotapplyiftherearelegalalternatives.(Heath,supra,207  Cal.App.3d#  # :  atp.900;Peoplev.Lewis(2004)120Cal.App.4th882,886.) Q    Theduressdefenseisnotavailableifthecrimeispunishablebydeath(orwhenthedefendantischargedwithmurder).(Peoplev.Vieira(2005)35Cal.4th264,289[itcannot   beusedtonegateexpressedmalice];  People#  ƅ#Ԁv.Anderson(2002)28Cal.4th767,776,779   [itcannotbeappliedtoanyformofmurder];butsee  id.atpp.#  J#Ԁ783784[itcanbeadefense   totheunderlyingfelonyinafelonymurdercase].)NECESSITY8   ` Thelaw,initsmajesticequality,forbidstherichaswellasthepoor 7 tosleepunderbridges  ...#  Ɵ#Ԁ'seeJ.Bartlett,FamiliarQuotations550(16thed. N 1992)[quoting_Anatole_ԀFrance](Hillv.Colorado(2000)530U.S.703,744 e (dis.opn.ofScalia,J.).)      Thedefendantisnotguiltyif(1)heorsheactedinanemergencytopreventasignificantharmorevil;(2)heorshehadnoadequatelegalalternative;(3)thedefendantdidnotcreateagreaterdangerthantheoneavoided;(4)thedefendantactuallybelievedthattheactwasnecessarytopreventthethreatenedharmorevil;(5)areasonablepersonwouldhavebelievedtheactwasnecessary;and(6)thedefendantdidnotsubstantiallycontributetotheemergency.(Peoplev.Kearns(1997)55  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ1128,1135;  People#  N#Ԁv.Heath "m (1989)207  Cal.App.3d#  #Ԁ892,898;see  People#  #Ԁv.Pena(1983)149  Cal.App.3d#  #ԀSupp.14,25 4# 26;CALCRIMNo.3403.)Unlikeduress,thethreatenedharmneednotbeimminent. K$ (Heath,supra,atp.901.) b%    Thedefendanthastheburdenofprovingthedefensebyapreponderanceoftheevidence.(  People#  #Ԁv.Heath(1989)207  Cal.App.3d#  Y#  Ԁ892,901#  ƥ#.)Butthedefinitionofsome (#! crimesincludeaphrasesuchas withoutlawfulexcuse.Insuchsituations,thedefendanthastheburdenofraisingareasonabledoubtthattheconductwasnotwithoutgoodcause.(See,e.g.,  People#  #Ԁv.Dewberry(1992)8  Cal.App.4th#  V#Ԁ1017,1021[defendantwouldbenot +<'$ guiltyofdetainingachildinviolationofacourtorderwhentheotherpersonwouldharmthechild].)  Thecourthasasuaspontedutytogivetheinstructionwhensupportedbysubstantialevidence.(SeeInre_Eichorn_(1998)69  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ382,389,relyingonPeoplev.Pepper  \ (1996)41  Cal.App.4th#  ƌ#Ԁ1029,1035[whichheldthecourtdidnoterrinfailingtogivethe # s instructionbecausetherewasinsufficientevidence].)  Thedefenseisnotavailableiftherearereasonablelegalalternatives.(Peoplev. h  Trippett(1997)56  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ1532,1539.)     Necessitydoesnotnegateanyelementofthecrime,butrepresentsapublicpolicydecisionnottopunishsuchanindividualdespiteproofofthecrime.[Citations.][]Animportantfactorofthenecessitydefenseinvolvesthebalancingofthehamtobeavoidedasopposedtothecostsofthecriminalconduct.[Citation.](  People#  #Ԁv.Heath(1989)207 B   Cal.App.3d#  D#  Ԁ892,#  Ɛ#901.)Generally,thenecessitydefenseexistsonlyifitisconsistentwith  Y publicpolicy.(See,e.g.,  Peoplev.Verlinde(2002)100#  X#  Cal.App.4th#  ƻ#  Ԁ1146,11641165  p [drunkpassengerdidnothaveadefensetogrossvehicularmanslaughterwhileintoxicatedwhenshegrabbedthewheelasthedrunkdriverfellasleep];#  #ԀPeoplev.Youngblood(2001) N 91  Cal.App.4th#  ?#Ԁ66,74[nonecessitydefenseforkeeping94catsdespitefearthattheywould e bekilled];Peoplev.Kearns(1997)55  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ1128,1135[necessityandduresswere | notavailabledefensesforanaddicted18yearoldforcedbyabusiveboyfriendtoparticipateinrobberies];  People#  #Ԁv.Waters(1986)163  Cal.App.3d#  u#Ԁ935,938;cf.Inre_Eichorn_Ԁ(1999)  69  Cal.App.4th#  "#Ԁ382,390[adefenseforahomelesspersonchargedwithsleepinginthe  park];  People#  #Ԁv.Lovercamp(1974)43  Cal.App.3d#  8#  Ԁ823,831832[adefensetononviolent ( escapefromprison];People#  Ƅ#Ԁv.Pena(1983)149  Cal.App.3d#  7#  ԀSupp.14,1920,2526[a ? defensetodrunk#  ƃ#Ԁdrivingwhenrespondingtofearsofhisgirlfriendbeingattacked].)Courts !V generallydonotapplyanecessitydefenseforactsofcivildisobedience.(See,e.g.,  People#  # "m v._Galambos_(2002)104  Cal.App.4th#  X#Ԁ1147,11601161,1164[nonecessitydefenseto 4# distributionofmedicalmarijuana];Peoplev._Trippett_(1997)56  Cal.App.4th#  P#Ԁ1532,1538; K$   People#  #Ԁv._Garziano_(1991)230  Cal.App.3d#  D#Ԁ241,244[blockingaccesstoabortionclinics]; b%  UnitedStatesv.OaklandCannabisBuyersCooperative(2001)532U.S.483,494.) y&!   '"    MENTALSTATEDEFENSESZMISTAKE8   ` Ifitlookslikeaduck,walkslikeaduckandquackslikeaduck,itsaduck  99"#  #Ԁnotaplatypus.(_Pieper_Ԁv.CommercialUnderwritersIns.Co. # s (1997)59Cal.App.4th1008,1014,  internalquotationmarksomitted#  #.):      Ineverypublicoffense,theremustexistaunion,orjointoperationofactandintent,orcriminalnegligence.  (Pen.Code,#  #Ԁ20.)Apersonisnotguiltyofacrimeifthe [_p]erson_   whocommittedtheactormadetheomissioncharged[acted]underanignoranceormistakeoffact,whichdisprovesanycriminalintent.  (Pen.Code,#  M#Ԁ26,subd.Three.)     Thecourthasasuaspontedutytoinstructonmistakeoffact.(Peoplev.Lucero +  (1988)203  Cal.App.3d#  K#Ԁ1011,1018.)Theinstructionmustbegivenonrequestifthereis B substantialevidence.(Peoplev.Goodman(1970)8  Cal.App.3d#  (#Ԁ705,709,disapprovedon  Y othergroundsin  People#  ƶ#Ԁv.Beagle(1972)6  Cal.3d#  #Ԁ441,452.)  p   Generally,ignoranceofthelawormistakeoflawisnotadefense.(Peoplev. N OBrien(1892)96Cal.171,176;seeCheekv.UnitedStates(1991)498U.S.192,199;see e CALCRIMNo.3407.)  Mistakeorignoranceofthelawcaninsomesituationsnegatespecificintent.(See,e.g.,  People#  #Ԁv.Marsh(1962)58  Cal.2d#  I#Ԁ732,742743[conspiracytopracticemedicine  withoutalicenserequiresknowledgethattheirconductwouldconstitutepracticingmedicine];  People#  6#Ԁv._Urziceanu_(2005)132  Cal.App.4th#  ƺ#Ԁ747,776[itwasadefenseto ? conspiracythatthedefendantbelieveddistributioninamarijuanabuyerscooperativewouldnotbeillegal];  People#  Ʈ#Ԁv.Flora(1991)228  Cal.App.3d#  #Ԁ662,669670[honestbeliefthata "m custodyorderfromanotherstatewasnotenforceableinCaliforniawasadefensetoviolatingacustodyorder];  People#  #Ԁv.Gregory(1990)217  Cal.App.3d#  g#Ԁ665,675679[nofraudonthe K$ governmentwhendefendantwasunawareshouldhavedisclosedcertaininformationonaform];  People#  E#Ԁv._Vineberg_(1981)125  Cal.App.3d#  #Ԁ127,137;  People#  (#Ԁv.Bowman(1958)156 y&!   Cal.App.2d#  Ɲ#Ԁ784,797[conspiracyrequiresproofthedefendantbelievedtheywouldbe '"  committingacrime];butsee  People#  g#Ԁv.Parker(1985)175  Cal.App.3d818,822[mistaken (#! beliefthatastructureisnotaresidenceisnotadefensetoreduceresidentialburglarytoseconddegree].)#  #Mistakeorignoranceofthelawcanbeadefensewhenthedefendanthas *%&# adutytoactbutisunawareoftheduty.(Lambertv.California(1957)355U.S.225[failing +<'$ toregister];  People#  ƒ#Ԁv.Garcia(2001)25  Cal.4th#  #Ԁ744,754[failuretoproperlyregisterasa  sexoffender].)  Foradistinctionbetweenmistakeoffactandmistakeoflaw,see  People#  #Ԁv._Honig_ E (1996)48Cal.App.4th289,348,fn.26.  Mistakeoffactisadefensewhenthedefendantsactionswouldnothavebeenillegalhadthefactsknownorassumedbyhimorherwereactuallytrue.(Peoplev.Vogel(1956) Q  46Cal.2d798,801[itwasadefensetobigamythatdefendanthonestlybelievedthepreviousmarriagehadbeenterminated];Peoplev.Watkins(1992)2  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ589.)Itisadefense   togeneralintentcrimesifthedefendantsmistakenbeliefwasreasonable.(SeeCALCRIMNo.3406.)  Bycomparison,ifthedefendanttriedtocommitacrimeandwouldhavecommittedthecrimehadthebelievedfactsbeentrue,thedefenseisimpossibility.Factualimpossibilityisnotadefensetomostinchoatecrimes.(See,e.g.,  People#  #Ԁv._Rizo_Ԁ(2000)22  Cal.4th#  f#Ԁ681,  Y 685[attempt];  People#  #Ԁv.Liu(1996)46  Cal.App.4th#  8#Ԁ1119,11301131[conspiracyexists  p evenifoneofthecoconspiratorsneverintendedtocarryoutthecrime];  People#  #Ԁv._Fraize_ 7 (1995)36  Cal.App.4th#  Ɵ#  Ԁ1722,17251727[aidingandabetting];People#  #Ԁv.Thompson(1993) N 12  Cal.App.4th#  ƍ#  Ԁ195,202203[guiltyofattemptedrapewhenvictimdiedbeforethe e intercourse]#  #  ;#  Ɔ#  People#  #  Ԁv._Peppars_(1983)140Cal.App.3d677,688.)Forthedifference | betweenlegalandfactualimpossibility,see#  #  People#  #  Ԁv.Braze(1997)57#  G#  Cal.App.4th#  Ơ#  Ԁ1,7.)  Asapracticalmatter,impossibilityandmistakeareusuallytreatedthesame.(See,e.g.,#  #Peoplev.Rojas(1961)55  Cal.2d#  #Ԁ252,258[describingattempttoreceivepurportedlystolen  propertyfromanundercoverofficertobeadefenseofmistake].)  Areasonablemistakeofageisadefenseforstatutoryrape(Peoplev.Hernandez !V (1964)61  Cal.2d#  $ #Ԁ529,532534;butsee  People#  Ɔ #  Ԁv.Scott(2000)83Cal.App.4th784,800[not "m adefensetointercoursewithaminoryoungerthan16whenthedefendantbelievedshewasaminor]#  #)andoralcopulationwithaminor(  People#  #Ԁv.Peterson(1981)126  Cal.App.3d#  A #  Ԁ396, K$ 397)#  ƍ #. b%    Mistakeofageisnotadefensetolewdconductwithaminorundertheageof14years(Peoplev.Olsen(1984)36  Cal.3d#  ƈ #Ԁ638,647648;InreDonaldR.(1993)14 (#!   Cal.App.4th#   #Ԁ1627,16291631),attemptedlewdconductwithaminorundertheageof16 )%" years(Peoplev.Paz(2000)80  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ293,294;seealsoPeoplev.Reed(1997)53 *%&#   Cal.App.4th#  Ƅ#Ԁ389,399[attemptedonaminorunder14]),aggravatedkidnappingofaminor +<'$ undertheageof14(Peoplev._Magpuso_(1994)23  Cal.App.4th#  Ɖ#Ԁ112,118),orgivingdrugs  toaminor(Peoplev.Williams(1991)233  Cal.App.3d#  6#Ԁ407,410412;  People#  Ɣ#Ԁv.Lopez(1969)  271  Cal.App.2d#  #  Ԁ754,760761#  T#). .   Mistakeofwhetherthegunwascapableoffiringwasnotadefensetoinvoluntarymanslaughterwhichrequiresonlycriminalnegligence.(Peoplev._Velez_(1983)144 # s   Cal.App.3d#  Ʀ#Ԁ558,565566.)Buttheaccidentdefenseappliedtoaccidentlypullingthe :  trigger.(  People#  `#Ԁv.Jones(1991)234Cal.App.3d1303,1314;  People#  #Ԁv.Thurmond(1985) Q  175Cal.App.3d865,865872.)  Mistakenbeliefthatthepropertytakenwasthedefendantsisadefensetolarcenyandembezzlementbutnotforciblecrimes,suchasrobbery.(Seeclaimofright,above.)  Areasonable,goodfaithbeliefanadultvictimconsentedtosexualactivityisadefensetoforciblerape.(Peoplev._Mayberry_(1975)15  Cal.3d#  #Ԁ143,153158;see  CALJIC B No.#  C#Ԁ10.65.)Thecourtshaveappliedthisdefenseinlimitedcircumstanceswherethe  Y allegationwasthatthevictimsequivocalconductwouldhaveledadefendantreasonablyandingoodfaithtobelieveconsentexistedwhenitdidnot.(Peoplev._Dominguez_(2006) 7 39Cal.4th1141,1149[adefensethatthevictimactuallyconsentedtosexdidnotleadtoa N _Mayberry_defense];Peoplev.Williams(1992)4  Cal.4th#  #Ԁ354,360362.)Thedefendant's e mistakenbeliefinthevictim'sconsentmustbereasonable.(Williams,supra,atpp.360 | 361.)Thedefensedidnotapplywhenthevictimwithdrewherconsentduringintercourse.  (InreJohnZ.(2003)29  Cal.4th#  M#Ԁ756,760.)Itdidnotapplytorapeofanunconscious  person.(  Peoplev._Dancy_Ԁ(2002)102Cal.App.4th21,3637[#  #wife'spurportedadvanced  consenttohavesexwhenshepassedoutwasnotreasonable];  People#  #Ԁv._Giardino_(2000)82 ( Cal.App.4th454,471.)Thecourthasasuaspontedutytogivetheinstructioninthe ? appropriatecase.(Williams,supra,atp.362;_Mayberry_,supra,atpp.153158.)The !V defendanthastheburdenofpresentingevidenceandraisingareasonabledoubt.  (Id.atpp.#  # "m 361364.) 4#   Mistakeoffactbasedonvoluntaryintoxicationisnotadefensetoageneralintentcrime.(Peoplev.Kelly(1973)10  Cal.3d#  #Ԁ565,573;see  People#  V#Ԁv.Scott(1983)146 y&!   Cal.App.3d#  #Ԁ823,829833.) '"    Imperfectselfdefensederived,inpart,ongoodfaithmistakenbeliefoftheneedtodefendoneself.(See  People#  ƶ #Ԁv.Flannel(1979)25  Cal.3d#  !#Ԁ668,686.) *%&#  +<'$   Becauseamistakeoffactmustbereasonable,mistakepredicatedondelusionsormentalillnessisnotadefensetoageneralintentcrime.(  People#  1"#Ԁv.Castillo(1987)193    Cal.App.3d#  ƨ"#  Ԁ119,124125#  "#;Peoplev.Gutierrez(1986)180  Cal.App.3d#  j##Ԁ1076,10831084.) .   Relianceontheadviceofanattorneyisgenerallynotadefense,especiallytogeneralintentcrimes,becausethisisconsideredtobeamistakeoflaw.(Peoplev.Snyder(1982) # s 32  Cal.3d#  $#Ԁ590,593[attorneytellingdefendanttheunderlyingcrimewasamisdemeanor :  whenitwasactuallyafelonywasnotadefensetofeloninpossessionofafirearm];  People#  %# Q  v._Honig_(1996)48  Cal.App.4th#  ]&#Ԁ289,347348;  People#  Ƽ&#Ԁv._Aresen_(1949)91  Cal.App.2d#  <'#Ԁ26, h  35;  People#  ƨ'#Ԁv._McCalla_(1923)63  Cal.App.#  )(#783,793,disapprovedonothergroundsin     People#  Ƶ(#Ԁv.Elliot(1960)59  Cal.2d#  )#Ԁ498;seealsoPeoplev._Chacon_(2007)40Cal.4th558,   570571[noentrapmentdefensewhencityofficialreliedontheadviceofasubordinatecityattorney].)̚INTOXICATION8   ` Ibelieve,ifwetakehabitualdrunkardsasaclass,theirheadsandtheirheartswillbearanadvantageouscomparisonwiththoseofanyotherclass.!AbrahamLincolnN     Voluntaryintoxicationisadefensetospecificintentcrimes.  (Pen.Code,#  +#Ԁ22,subd. | (b);  People#  +#Ԁv.Mendoza(1998)18  Cal.4th#  Y,#  Ԁ1114,11311134;#  Ƣ,#seeCALCRIMNo.3426.)It  isnotadefensetogeneralintentcrimes.  (Pen.Code,#  W-#Ԁ22,subd.(a);  People#  Ƽ-#Ԁv.Atkins(2001)  25  Cal.4th#  0.#Ԁ76,81[arson];  People#  ƍ.#Ԁv.Hood(1969)1  Cal.3d#  .#Ԁ444,451[assault].)Norisita  defensetocrimeswherethemensreaisknowledge,malice.premeditation,deliberation,orconsciousdisregard.  (Pen.Code,#  /#Ԁ22,subd.(a);Peoplev.Saille(1991)54  Cal.3d#  ^0#Ԁ1103, ? 1116;  People#  0#Ԁv._Timms_(2007)151  Cal.App.4th#  K1#Ԁ1292,13001301[voluntaryintoxication !V nowirrelevanttomentalstateofwhetherthereisimpliedmaliceorconsciousdisregard];  People#  32#Ԁv.Martin(2000)78  Cal.App.4th#  Ɠ2#Ԁ1107,11141115.)  Ԁ#  2#  PenalCodesection#  63#Ԁ22 4# eliminatesthedefensethatthedefendantlackedthecapacitytocontrolhisbehavior,butthereisstilladefensethatintoxicationpreventedtheactualformationofintent.(  People#  W4#  Ԁv. b%  Olea(1984)160#  Ɵ4#  Cal.App.3d#  5#  Ԁ891,896897#  X5#  .)#  Ƨ5#ԀIntoxicationincludestheingestionofdrugs. y&!   (Pen.Code,#  06#ԁ22,subd.(c).) '"    Thereisnosuaspontedutytoinstructonvoluntaryorinvoluntaryintoxication.(Peoplev.Saille(1991)54  Cal.3d#  *7#Ԁ1103,1119.) *%&#  +<'$   Voluntaryintoxicationisstillrelevantindeterminingifthedefendantformedtherequiredmentalstate.(Peoplev.Saille(1991)54  Cal.3d#  D8#Ԁ1103,1119[ifthedefendantnever  informedtheintenttokill,thehomicideisreducedtoinvoluntarymanslaughter];  People#  #9# . v.Reyes(1997)52  Cal.App.4th#  Ɩ9#  Ԁ975,982986[voluntaryintoxicationwasrelevantto E whetherthedefendantknowinglypossessedstolenproperty];#  9#  People#  Ʈ:#Ԁv.Webber(1991)228  \   Cal.App.3d#  #;#Ԁ1146,11601165.) # s Ѐ  Involuntaryintoxicationisadefense.(SeeCALCRIMNo.3427.)Consumingsomethingthatthedefendantdidnotknowwasspikedisconsideredtobeinvoluntaryintoxication.(Peoplev.Scott(1983)146  Cal.App.3d#  {<#Ԁ823,831833[punchspikedwith   PCP];butsee  People#  =#Ԁv._Velez_(1985)175  Cal.App.3d#  ƍ=#Ԁ785,795796[smokingpotlacedwith   PCPwasnotadefense;thoughthedefendantdidnotknowitwaslacedwithPCP,marijuanafrequentlyis].)Adeliberateoverdoseinasuicideattemptdidnotqualifyasinvoluntaryintoxication.(  People#  >#Ԁv._Chaffey_(1994)25  Cal.App.4th#  ]?#Ԁ852,855857.) +      PenalCodesection#  ?#Ԁ29limitsexperttestimonyonwhetherthedefendantlackedthe  Y intentduetointoxication.(Peoplev._Rangel_(1992)11  Cal.App.4th#  @#Ԁ291,300303.)  p ̚UNCONSCIOUSNESS  Apersonisnotguiltyofacrimeifheorshe committedtheactchargedwithoutbeingconsciousoftheactions.  (Pen.Code,#  A#Ԁ26,subd.Four.)    Acourthasasuaspontedutytogivetheinstructionifthereissufficientevidence.(See  People#  B#Ԁv.Babbitt(1988)45  Cal.3d#  4C#Ԁ660,695696;  People#  ƎC#Ԁv.Ray(1975)14  Cal.3d#  C#Ԁ20, ( 26.)  Becausethereisapresumptionthatapersonwhoappearsconsciousisso,thedefendanthasadutytopresentevidence;thedefendantsburdenofpersuasionistoraiseareasonabledoubtthatthemensreaislacking.(Peoplev.Hardy(1948)33  Cal.2d#  ]E#Ԁ52,63 K$ 64;  People#  E#Ԁv.Kitt(1978)83  Cal.App.3d#  'F#Ԁ834,842,disapprovedonothergroundsin  People#  ơF# b%  v.Cooper(1991)53  Cal.3d#  G#Ԁ771,836;  People#  kG#Ԁv.Cruz(1978)83  Cal.App.3d#  G#Ԁ308,332;see y&!   alsoPeople#  ;H#Ԁv.Babbitt(1988)45  Cal.3d#  ƧH#  Ԁ660,#  H#689694.) '"    Evidenceonlythatthedefendantdidnotremembertheincidentisusuallyinsufficientevidencetowarrantaninstruction.(Peoplev.Rogers(2006)39  Cal.4th#  J#Ԁ826,887888; *%&# Peoplev._Heffington_(1973)32  Cal.App.3d#  ƱJ#Ԁ1,10;  People#  K#Ԁv._Coston_(1947)82  Cal.App.2d#  ƈK# +<'$ 23,4041;  People#  K#Ԁv._Sameniego_(1931)118  Cal.App.165,173.)7d#  {L# d   Legalunconsciousnessincludesblackouts,epilepticseizure,involuntaryintoxication,andsleepwalking.(  People#  wM#Ԁv._Methever_(1901)132Cal.326,329330[sleepwalkingor  delirium],overruledonothergroundsin  People#  ]N#Ԁv._Gorshen_(1953)51  Cal.2d#  N#  Ԁ716#  &O#;People   v.Cox(1944)67  Cal.App.2d#  ƠO#Ԁ166,172[blackout];  People#  P#Ԁv.Freeman(1943)61  Cal.App.2d#  fP# #  110,115116[epilepsy];seeCALCRIMNo.3425;  Ԁ#  P#seegenerally  People#  OQ#Ԁv.Hughes(2002) :  27  Cal.4th#  Q#Ԁ287,343344.) Q     Unconsciousnessdoesnotmeanthattheactorliesstillandunresponsive.Instead,apersonisdeemedunconsciousifheorshecommittedtheactwithoutbeingconsciousthereof.(  People#  S#Ԁv._Haley_(2004)34  Cal.4th#  ƃS#  Ԁ283,313;#  S#  People#  T#  Ԁv.Ochoa(1998)19#  eT#  Cal.4th#  ƾT#   a 353,423;#  U#  People#  kU#  Ԁv.Kelly(1976)10#  ƳU#  Cal.3d#  V#  Ԁ565,572;#  TV#  People#  ƤV#  Ԁv._Velez_(1985)175#  V#  Cal.App.3d#  fW#   x 785,791.)#  ƲW#Ԁ Unconsciousness,asthetermisusedintherulejustcited,neednotreachthe  physicaldimensionscommonlyassociatedwiththeterm(coma,inertia,incapabilityoflocomotionormanualaction,andsoon);itcanexist!andtheabovestatedrulecanapply   !wherethesubjectphysicallyactsinfactbutisnot,atthetime,consciousofacting.   (Peoplev.Newton(1970)8  Cal.App.3d#  Y#Ԁ359,376[HueyNewtonnotawareofhisactions 7 inkillingpoliceofficerafterbeingshot].) N   Voluntaryintoxicationleadingtounconsciousnessisgovernedby  PenalCodesection#  [# |0 22,notsection26.(Peoplev._Halvorsen_(2007)42  Cal.4th#  [#Ԁ349,418;Peoplev.Walker G (1993)14  Cal.App.4th#  X\#Ԁ1615,1621.) ^   Involuntaryintoxicationleadingtounconsciousnessisadefense.(Peoplev.  _Halvorsen_(2007)42  Cal.4th#  p]#Ԁ349,418419;seePeoplev.Peoplev._Heffington_(1973)32    Cal.App.3d#  0^#Ԁ1,8.) ! IMPAIRMENT8   ` "Ihatetoadvocatedrugs,alcohol,violenceorinsanitytoanyone,butthey'vealwaysworkedforme." Ӏ!HunterS.Thompsony&-%"     Evidenceofmentalimpairmentisrelevanttoshowthedefendantdidnotformtherequisiteintent.Thisdefenseisavailableforspecificintentcrimes,orcrimesrequiringmaliceaforethoughtorknowledge.  (Pen.Code,#  K`#Ԁ28,subd.(a);  People#  ư`#Ԁv.Saille(1991)54 y*-)&   Cal.3d#  $a#Ԁ1103,1119;  People#  |a#Ԁv.Reyes(1997)52  Cal.App.4th#  a#  Ԁ975,982986;see#  (b#CALCRIM y+-*' No.  Ԁ3428#  Ɯb#.)Thedefenseisnotavailableforgeneralintentcrimes.(SeePeoplev.Mendoza  (1998)18  Cal.4th#  [c#Ԁ1114,11311134.)    Thereisnotasuaspontedutytogiveaninstructiononmentalimpairment,butitmustbegivenuponrequestifthereissubstantialevidence.(  People#  od#Ԁv.Saille(1991)54  Cal.3d#  d#    1103,1119.)#  e#     Thereisnolongeradefenseofdiminishedcapacity.  (Pen.Code,#  e#Ԁ28,subd.(a);     People#  Kf#  Ԁv.Saille(1991)54#  Ɠf#  Cal.3d#  f#  Ԁ1103,1119.)#  5g#       PenalCodesection#  ƭg#Ԁ29limitsthetestimonyofanexpertwitnessonwhetherthe   defendantformedtherequisiteintent.(Peoplev._Coddington_(2000)23  Cal.4th#  h#Ԁ529,582   583,disapprovedonothergroundsinPricev.  SuperiorCourt#  Yi#Ԁ(2001)25  Cal.4th#  Ʒi#Ԁ1046,1069,   fn.13;  People#  ,j#Ԁv.Nunn(1996)50  Cal.App.4th#  Ɗj#Ԁ1357,13641365.)     Ifadefendantisphysicallyimpaired,theissueiswhetherheorsheisformedthesamemensreaasareasonablepersonwiththesamephysicaldisabilitywouldhaveinthesamesituation.(Peoplev.Matthews(1994)25  Cal.App.4th#  k#Ԁ89,99100[adefendantwho  wasblind,hearingimpaired,andconfinedtoawheelchairwaschargedwithbrandishingafirearmatpolice;thedefensewasentitledtoaninstructionthatthejurymusttakehisphysicaldisabilitiesintoaccount];seeCALCRIMNo.3429.)Thisinstructiondoesnotapplytomentalimpairment.(SeePeoplev.Jefferson(2004)119  Cal.App.4th#  Ƽm#Ԁ508,519.)    ENTRAPMENT*nTHEPRINCIPLE8   ` Thedefense[ofentrapment]appearstohavefirstbeenassertedbyEve,whocomplained,whenchargedwitheatingfruitofthetreeofknowledgeofgoodandevil:Theserpentbeguiledme,andIdideat.' ! (Genesis3:13.)(  People#  zo#Ԁv.Barraza(1979)23Cal.3d675,686,fn.1.)"     Theprinciplebehindtheentrapmentdefensewasdiscussedin  People#  `p#Ԁv.Barraza $  (1979)23Cal.3d675.Thereisanobjectiveversioninwhichthereis (1)governmentalinstigationandinducementoversteptheboundsofpermissibility,and(2)thedefendantdidnotharborapreexistingcriminalintent.  (Id.atp.#  Ʋq#Ԁ686.)Thereisasubjectiveversionin '## whichthedefendantmustalsoshowhelackedadispositiontocommitthecrime.  (Id.atpp.#  ƒr# ($$ 686687.)Thisisthefederalstandard.(Matthewsv.UnitedStates(1988)485U.S.58,63.) )%% Thefederalstandardhasbeencriticizedforcondoningpolicemisconduct,forapplyingadifferentstandardofjusticedependingonthedefendant,andforpermittingtheadmission +'' ofotherwiseinadmissibledamningevidenceofthedefendant'scharacter.  (Id.atpp.#  ƅt#Ԁ686  688.)Ontheotherhand,thereisastrongreluctancetosetfreethosewhoundisputedlybrokethelaw,manyofwhomappearperfectlywillingtodoso9if9giventheopportunity.99STATELAW  Californiaclaimstouse ahybridposition.(Barraza,supra,23  Cal.3d#  !v#Ԁatp.688.)    [_W]e_ԀholdthatthepropertestforentrapmentinCaliforniaisthefollowing:wastheconductofthelawenforcementagentlikelytoinduceanormallylawabidingpersonto% 9 %9\wcommittheoffense?99Forthepurposesofthistest,wepresumethatsuchapersonwouldnormallyresistthetemptationtocommitacrimepresentedbythesimpleopportunitytoactunlawfully.Officialconductthatdoesnomorethanofferthatopportunitytothesuspect!forexample,   adecoyprogram!isthereforepermissible;butitisimpermissibleforthepoliceortheir   agentstopressurethesuspectbyoverbearingconductsuchasbadgering,cajoling,importuning,orotheraffirmativeactslikelytoinduceanormallylawabidingpersontocommitthecrime.(Barraza,supra,atpp.689690;seeX[XCALCRIMNo.#XX[z#Ԁ3408.)    Anentrapmentinstructionmustbegivensuasponteifthereissubstantialevidence.(Peoplev.Watson(2000)22Cal.4th220,222;Barraza,supra,23Cal.3datp.691.)    Thedefendanthastheburdenofprovingentrapmentbyapreponderanceoftheevidencetoall12jurors.(  People#  {#Ԁv.McIntyre(1990)222Cal.App.3d229,232233;seealso  Peoplev.Moran(1970)1Cal.3d755,760761.)Thisisbecause entrapmentisacollateral  issuenotaffectingadefendant'scriminalintent;rather,itprohibitsdefendant'spunishmentforthecrimebecauseofimproperpoliceconduct.(McIntyre,supra,atp.232.)    Entrapmentcanincludestatementsbylawenforcementpromisingtheactisnotillegalorwouldgoundetected,offeringsomeextraordinarybenefit,ormanipulatingthedefendantbybadgering,flattery,coaxing,insistentrequests,offersoffriendshiporpleasforsympathy.(Barraza,supra,23Cal.3datp.690;seeBradleyv.Duncan  (9thCir.#  !#Ԁ2002)315F.3d1091, ! 1096[grantingfederalwritbecausestateentrapmentwouldapplytolawenforcementusingadecoywhowaswithdrawingfromdrugstobegfordrugs].)Entrapmentexistsifthemanipulatingisdonebyaprivatepersonasanagentoflawenforcement.(Peoplev. $  _McIntire_(1979)23Cal.3d742,748.) %!!   Simplygivingthedefendantanopportunitytocommitacrime,suchasadecoyprogramorstingoperation,isnotentrapment.(Barraza,supra,23Cal.3datp.690;accord ($$   People#  #Ԁv.Watson(2000)22Cal.4th220,223[makinganautotheftlookparticularly )%% attractivebystaginganarrestofamotoristinapoorneighborhoodandleavingthekeyintheunlockedcarwasnotentrapment];_Provigo_ԀCorp.v.AlcoholicBeverageControl +'' AppealsBd.(1994)7Cal.4th561,568569[minoragentbuyingalcohol];Dept.ofAlcoholic  BeverageControlv.AlcoholicBeverageControlAppealsBd.(4805Convoy,Inc.)(2002)  100Cal.App.4th1094,10991100[itisirrelevantifthecriminalplanoriginatedfromlawenforcementofficers];  People#  ф#Ԁv.Reed(1997)53Cal.App.4th389[officeranswers  defendant'ssolicitation].)  Inconsistentdefensesarepermissible.Thedefendantcanclaimentrapmentandstillclaimhedidnotcommitthecrime.(Peoplev.Perez(1965)62Cal.2d769,775776;see   Matthewsv.UnitedStates(1988)485U.S.58,6368.)   VARIATIONSOFTHEENTRAPMENTDEFENSE8   `  No,no!saidtheQueen. Sentencefirst  Ԁ"#  !#Ԁverdictafterwards.   (Carroll,AlicesAdventuresinWonderland(1865)ch.XII,AlicesEvidence.)(Peoplev._Casillas_(2001)92Cal.App.4th171,180.)     Entrapmentbyestoppelwhentheofficertellsthedefendantthatcertainconductislawfulandthedefendantbelievestheofficer.(Peoplev.Bray(1975)52Cal.App.3d494,  499[calledthe officialadviceexcuse];  People#  v#Ԁv.Ferguson(1933)134Cal.App.41,53;  see  People#  #Ԁv._Benford_(1959)53Cal.2d1.9[asanentrapmentdefense];  People#  ư#Ԁv.Mello  (2002)97Cal.App.4th511,518,fn.2;  People#  C#Ԁv._Cappuccio_,Inc.(1988)204Cal.App.3d  750,765;  People#  #Ԁv._Gonda_(1982)138Cal.App.3d774,780,fn.3;  People#  Ƙ#Ԁv._Sapse_  (1980)104Cal.App.3dSupp.1,12;UnitedStatesv.Penn.IndustrialChem.Corp.(1973)  411U.S.655,674;Coxv.Louisiana(1965)379U.S.559,569571;_Raley_Ԁv.Ohio(1959)  360U.S.423,438439;UnitedStatesv.Gil  (9thCir.#  \#Ԁ2002)297F.3d93,107;UnitedStates  v.RamirezValencia  (9thCir.#  #Ԁ2000)202F.3d1106,1109(percuriam).)Butthedefensedid  notapplywhenacityofficialreliedontheopinionofacityattorneywhowasthecityofficial'sinferiorofficer.(Peoplev._Chacon_(2007)40Cal.4th558,570571.)    Officialagentdefense.Itisadefensetopossessionordistributionofdrugsforalawenforcementofficerorprivatepersontobeactingasapoliceagentinastingoperation.  (Health&Saf.Code,#  A#Ԁ11367;seeCALCRIMNo.3409.)Adefendant'sgoodfaithmistake # inbelievinghisactionswereimmunizedisadefense.(Peoplev.Lucero(1988)203 $  Cal.App.3d1011,1017;butsee  People#  Ɓ#Ԁv.Jones(1962)200Cal.App.2d805,813.) %!!   Sentencingentrapmentrequiresreducingthecrimetoalessercharge(oreliminatinganenhancementorpenaltyprovision)whenthedefendantwaspredisposedtocommitalessseriousoffensebutwasentrappedbylawenforcementofficerstocommitamoreseriousoffense.ThedefensehasnotbeenacceptedinCalifornia.(Peoplev.Smith(2003)31 *&& Cal.4th1207,12111212,1216;  People#  ư#Ԁv.Graves(2001)93Cal.App.4th171,179.)Ithas +'' beenacceptedbyfederalcourts.(See,e.g.,UnitedStatesv.Parilla  (9thCir.#  Ɛ#Ԁ1997)114  F.3d124,127[undercoverofficertradesagunfordrugstochargethedefendantwillpossessionofgunaswell];UnitedStatesv._Lacey_(10thCir.1996)86F.3d956,963;United  Statesv._Montoya_  (9thCir.#  #Ԁ1995)62F.3d1,45;UnitedStatesv._Staufer_  (9thCir.#  #Ԁ1994)38  F.3d1103,1107[officerbuymoredrugsthandefendantrequested];  Thereisarelatedconceptofsentencemanipulationwhereofficersuseoutrageousconducttoaggravateacrime,creatingadueprocessviolation.Californiahasnotacceptedthisdefenseeither.(Peoplev.Smith(2003)31Cal.4th1207,12111212.)     MISCELLANEOUSDEFENSESACCIDENT8   ` [_W]e_Ԁmustrejectthedistrictattorney'sanomalouspositionthataclaimantmustrigidlycomplywithstatutoryproceduresbutcloseisgoodenoughforgovernmentwork.(_Nasir_Ԁv.SacramentoCountyOfficeofthe  Dist.Atty.(1992)11Cal.App.4th976,987.)     Apersonisnotcriminalculpableforhisorheractionsiftheywerecommitted throughmisfortuneoraccident,whenitappearsthattherewasnoevildesign,intention,orculpablenegligence.  (Pen.Code,#  =#Ԁ26,subd.Five.)    Forapersontobeguiltyofageneralintentcrime,thepersonneedonlycommittheactoromissionwithoutneedingtointendtheconsequence.(See,e.g.,Halev.Morgan  (1978)22Cal.3d388,396;Peoplev.Lopez(1986)168Cal.App.3d592,598.)Sowhatis  anaccident?  Accidentisdefinedasthelackofintent.Intentisdefined,inpart,aslackofanaccident.X[XCALCRIMNo.#XX[u#Ԁ510,forexample,statesaccidentforexcusablehomicideas ! follows: 1.thedefendantwasdoingalawfulactinalawfulway;[]2.Thedefendantwasactingwithusualandordinarycaution;[]AND[]3.Thedefendantwasactingwithoutanyunlawfulintent.Similarly,X[XCALCRIMNo.#XX[#Ԁ3404states [_t]he_Ԁdefendantisnotguiltyof $  if(he/she)acted[orfailedtoact]withouttheintentrequiredforthatcrime,butactedaccidentally.Onecasestates, [_t]he_Ԁaccidentdefenseamountstoaclaimthatthedefendantactedwithoutformingthementalstatenecessarytomakehisorheractionsacrime.(Peoplev.Lara(1996)44Cal.App.4th102,110.) ($$   X[XCALCRIM#XX[q#saysthecourtdoesnothaveasuasponteresponsibilitytoinstructon *&& accident,butitmustgivetheinstructionuponrequestifthereissubstantialevidence.(citing +'' Peoplev._Acosta_Ԁ(1955)45Cal.2d538,544[holdingthatfailuretoinstructontherequested  accidentinstructionwaserror];butseePeoplev._Bohana_(2000)84Cal.App.4th360,370  [statingtherewasasuaspontedutytogivetheinstruction];Peoplev.Gonzalez(1999)74  Cal.App.4th382,389[same];  People#  R#Ԁv.Jones(1991)234Cal.App.3d1303,13131314  [same].)Itisoftenarguedthatthefailuretoinstructonaccidentisharmlessbecausethejuryisinstructedelsewhereonthedefinitionofintent.Afindingofintentnecessarilynegatedtheexistenceofanaccident.(See,e.g.,  People#  Ѧ#Ԁv.Jones(1991)234Cal.App.3d1303,1314   1316.)  Theaccidentdefenseappliestogeneralintentcrimesandnegligencecrimessuchasinvoluntarymanslaughter.  (Pen.Code,#  #Ԁ26,subd.Five.)Iftheoffenseisageneralintent   crime,theaccidentdefenseisavailableevenifthedefendantactsnegligently.(Lara,supra,   44  Cal.3d#  #Ԁatp.110.)     Examplesofwhenanaccidentdefensewasavailableareasfollows:Defendantchargedwithwillfullyinflictingcorporalinjury  (Pen.Code,#  #Ԁ273.5)when,duringan  argument,heopenedacloseddoorandhitthevictimwho,unbeknownsttohim,wasdirectlybehindthedoor.(Peoplev.Gonzalez(1999)74Cal.App.4th382.)Defendantwasinan  argumentandwasleavinguntilthevictimimploredhimtostay;hespunaroundtofaceherbutthesideofhisrighthandstruckherintheface,breakinghernose.(Peoplev.Lara  (1996)44Cal.App.4th102,105.)Thedefendantdidnotmeantofirethegun.(  People#  ]#Ԁv.  Jones(1991)234Cal.App.3d1303,1314;  People#  #Ԁv.Thurmond(1985)175Cal.App.3d865,  865872.)Thedefendantwasnotguiltyofassaultorbatterywithacarwhenhewasarguingwithapassengerandhitapedestrianbecausehewasnotlookingwherehewasdriving.(Peoplev._Brucker_(1983)148Cal.App.3d230,235236.)    Thereisnoaccidentifthedefendanthitthevictimwhothenfellintoaswimmingpoolanddrowned(i.e.,herfallinginthepoolwasnotlegallyanaccident).(Peoplev.  _Bohana_(2000)84Cal.App.4th360,370371.)Butifthevictimfallswhiletryingtoescape   thedefendant,whohasnottouchedheryet,heisnotguiltyofbattery.Thisisnotreallyanaccidentdefense;theresimplyisnooffensivetouching.(Peoplev.Jackson(2000)77 " Cal.App.4th574.)ALIBI   ` Someotherdudedidit.' '##   Thereisnotasuaspontedutytoinstructonalibi,butitmustbegivenuponrequest.(Peoplev.Freeman(1978)22Cal.3d434,437438;  People#  ұ#Ԁv._Whitson_(1944)22Cal.3d *&& 434,437438;seeX[XCALCRIMNo.#XX[#Ԁ3401.) +'' Ї  Thealibidefenseappliesifthedefendantclaimshecouldnothavecommittedthecrimebecausehewasnotpresent.Thedefensedoesnotapplyiftheprosecutiondoesnotcontendhewaspresent.(Peoplev._Sarkis_(1990)222Cal.App.3d23,2628.)    Whenwasthedefendantnotsupposedtobethere?Itispropertoallegeacrimeoccurredonoraboutacertaindateorwithinarangeofdates.  (Pen.Code,#  ʴ#Ԁ951,955.)   Theprosecutionnormallyneednotprovetheexactdateofthecrime.(SeeX[XCALCRIMNo.#XX[#   207;  CALJICNo.#  #Ԁ4.71.)Butifthecrimeallegedlyoccurredatacertaintime,andthe   defenseisalibi,thisinstructionshouldnotbegiven.(Peoplev.Jones(1973)9Cal.3d546,   557,overruledonothergroundsinHernandezv.MunicipalCourt(1989)49Cal.3d713;     People#  ƈ#Ԁv.Barney(1983)143Cal.App.3d490,497498;seePeoplev.Jennings(1991)53   Cal.3d334,358359.)   CHARACTERDEFENSE8   ` Acourtcannotimplyanotherisakangaroocourtontherecord.(Peoplev._Zachery_(2007)147  Cal.App.4th#  #Ԁ380,390393.)     Inacriminalaction,evidenceofthedefendant'scharacteroratraitofhischaracterintheformofanopinionorevidenceofhisreputation  is...#  ;#Ԁ[admissible]ifsuchevidence  is:[](a)Offeredbythedefendanttoprovehisconductinconformitywithsuchcharacterortraitofcharacter.[](b)Offeredbytheprosecutiontorebutevidenceadducedbythedefendantundersubdivision(a).  Ԁ(Evid.Code,#  ƙ#Ԁ1102;seeCALCRIMNos.350,351.)    Thecourthasnosuaspontedutytogiveacharacterdefenseinstruction,butitmustbegivenuponrequest.(Peoplev.Bell(1875)49Cal.485,489490;  People#  ܼ#Ԁv.Wilson  (1913)23  Cal.App.513,523524;seealso#  P#  People#  Ƶ#  Ԁv.Eli(1967)66#  #  Cal.2d#  T#  Ԁ63,79#  Ɯ#  [must  instructuponrequesthowtoevaluatecrossexaminationofcharacterwitnesses];People#  #  Ԁv.  Hempstead(1983)148#  Ƣ#  Cal.App.3d#  #  Ԁ949,954#  `#  [same].)     Thedefendantneedonlyshowreasonabledoubthecommittedthecrime.(#  Ƭ#  People#  c# " v.Jones(1954)42  Cal.2d#  #Ԁ219,222.) # CLAIMOFRIGHT   ` Iappropriatewhatisalreadymine  ...#  Ǝ#Ԁ.!OscarWilde '##   Uponanyindictmentforembezzlement,itisasufficientdefensethatthepropertywasappropriatedopenlyandavowedly,andunderaclaimoftitlepreferredingoodfaith,eventhoughsuchclaimisuntenable.Butthisprovisiondoesnotexcusetheunlawful +'' retentionofthepropertyofanothertooffsetorpaydemandsheldagainsthim.  (Pen.Code,  #  ~#Ԁ511.)    Itisadefensetolarcenyaswellasembezzlementtotakepropertythedefendantactuallybelievesishisorhers,evenifthebeliefismistakenandunreasonable.  (#  Ʋ#  People#  #Ԁv.  _Tufunga_(1999)21  Cal.4th#  ƍ#Ԁ935,952;  People#  #Ԁv.Stewart(1976)16  Cal.3d#  E#  Ԁ133,140;#  ƍ# P  eople#  #   v._Romo_(1990)220  Cal.App.3d#  v#Ԁ514,518;seeCALCRIMNo.1863.)     Thecourthasasuaspontedutytogivetheinstructionwhensupportedbysubstantialevidence.(Peoplev._Creath_(1995)31  Cal.App.4th#  ƪ#Ԁ312,319;see  People#  #Ԁv.Barnett(1998)   17  Cal.4th#  ~#Ԁ1044,1145.)     Anactualbeliefisrequired.(  People#  #Ԁv.Barnett(1998)17  Cal.4th#  z#  Ԁ1044,1145;#  #ԀPeople   v.Stewart(1976)16  Cal.3d#  H#Ԁ133,139140;see  People#  Ʀ#Ԁv.Navarro(1979)99  Cal.App.3d#  #   Supp.1,4,1011.)  Thetakingmustbedoneopenly;itdoesnotapplyifthedefendantconcealsthetakenproperty.(Peoplev._Wooten_(1996)44  Cal.App.4th#  ,#Ԁ1834,18481849.)    However,adefendantcanbeguiltyoftheftofcommunitypropertyifheorsheintendstopermanentlydeprivethespouseoftheproperty.(Peoplev.Llamas(1997)51    Cal.App.4th#  n#Ԁ1729,17381740.)    Thedefensedoesnotapplywhenthedefendanttakessomeofvictimspropertytorepayadebt.(Peop