Section 3470 | CALCRIM (Jury Instructions)

[If you find that
<insert name of victim> threatened or
harmed the defendant [or others] in the past, you may consider that
information in deciding whether the defendant’s conduct and beliefs
were reasonable.]
[If you find that the defendant knew that
<insert name of
victim> had threatened or harmed others in the past, you may consider
that information in deciding whether the defendant’s conduct and beliefs
were reasonable.]
[Someone who has been threatened or harmed by a person in the past is
justified in acting more quickly or taking greater self-defense measures
against that person.]
[If you find that the defendant received a threat from someone else that
(he/she) reasonably associated with
<insert name of victim>,
you may consider that threat in deciding whether the defendant was
justified in acting in (self-defense/ [or] defense of another).]
[A defendant is not required to retreat. He or she is entitled to stand his
or her ground and defend himself or herself and, if reasonably necessary,
to pursue an assailant until the danger of (death/bodily injury/
<insert crime>) has passed. This is so even if safety could
have been achieved by retreating.]
The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that
the defendant did not act in lawful (self-defense/ [or] defense of another).
If the People have not met this burden, you must find the defendant not
guilty of
<insert crime(s) charged>.
New January 2006; Revised June 2007, April 2008, August 2009, February 2012,
August 2012, March 2022
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court must instruct on a defense when the defendant requests it and there is
substantial evidence supporting the defense. The court has a sua sponte duty to
instruct on a defense if there is substantial evidence supporting it and either the
defendant is relying on it or it is not inconsistent with the defendant’s theory of the
case. When the court concludes that the defense is supported by substantial evidence
and is inconsistent with the defendant’s theory of the case, however, it should
ascertain whether defendant wishes instruction on this alternate theory. (People v.
Gonzales (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 382, 389–390 [88 Cal.Rptr.2d 111]; People v.
Breverman (1998) 19 Cal.4th 142, 157 [77 Cal.Rptr.2d 870, 960 P.2d 1094].)
Substantial evidence means evidence of a defense, which, if believed, would be
sufficient for a reasonable jury to find a reasonable doubt as to the defendant’s guilt.
(People v. Salas (2006) 37 Cal.4th 967, 982–983 [38 Cal.Rptr.3d 624, 127 P.3d 40].)
CALCRIM No. 3470
DEFENSES AND INSANITY
1054

3471. Right to Self-Defense: Mutual Combat or Initial Aggressor
A person who (engages in mutual combat/ [or who] starts a fight) has a
right to self-defense only if:
1. (He/She) actually and in good faith tried to stop fighting;
[AND]
2. (He/She) indicated, by word or by conduct, to (his/her) opponent,
in a way that a reasonable person would understand, that (he/she)
wanted to stop fighting and that (he/she) had stopped