Where the defendant’s entry into the victim’s home was no more than a mere misdemeanor trespass, defendant nonetheless forfeited his right to self-defense. Accordingly, the language contained in CALJIC 5.17, which instructed the jury that unlawful or wrongful conduct which created the circumstances legally justifies a victim’s use of force, was not misleading or prejudicial to defendant’s claim of imperfect self-defense. Here, the victim was entitled to respond to trespass with deadly force under Penal Code section 198.5, the Home Protection Bill of Rights, and while defendant had a duty to retreat, the victim did not. Instructing the jury per CALJIC 5.17 was not error.