What is the test for a jury to accept a defendant's argument of imperfect self-defense?

At a minimum, defendant must be able to explain how his theory of imperfect self-defense could have been argued to the jury, given the evidence. In spite of all this, defendant wants to impose upon the trial court an obligation " ' "to glean legal theories and winnow the evidence for remotely tenable and sophistical instructions." ' " (People v. Barton, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 197, 47 Cal.Rptr.2d 569, 906 P.2d 531.) We decline to do so.