In People v. Brenner (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 335, the defendant argued that the crime of misdemeanor intimidation ( 136.1, subd. (b)(1)) was a lesser included offense within the charged offense of felony intimidation ( 136.1, subdivision (c)(1)), and that the trial court erred in failing to instruct on that lesser included offense. ( Brenner, supra, 5 Cal.App.4th at p. 340.) Misdemeanor intimidation occurs, in part, when a person attempts to prevent or dissuade another person who has been the victim of a crime or who is witness to a crime from making any report of such victimization to any peace officer or state or local law enforcement officer. ( Brenner, supra, 5 Cal.App.4th at p. 340.) The addition of force or a threat of force upon the victim increases the offense to a felony. ( Id. at pp. 340-341.) In Brenner, the victim testified that the appellant said that if he called the police, the appellant would kill him. ( Brenner, supra, 5 Cal.App.4th at p. 341.) A witness testified that she heard appellant say to the victim something "'about hurting or wanting to kill him, things like that, I guess if he went to go get the police or something.'" (Ibid.) "Asked if he said anything to the victim while he was hitting him, appellant testified that 'I called him a punk, and I told him what kind of area this was, and where he shouldn't be--you know, better smarten up. He shouldn't be leaving his old lady around or something could happen.' According to appellant, when he and the other two men stopped hitting the victim, appellant just turned around and left the room." (Ibid.) The appellate court concluded that instruction on the lesser included offense of misdemeanor intimidation was not required, explaining: "If the jury believed the victim and the witness, then the felony offense of intimidation by force or threat was established. If the jury believed appellant, then there was no attempt to dissuade the victim from reporting the crime to the police and neither the felony offense nor the lesser included misdemeanor was established. There was no evidence from which the jury could reasonably conclude that appellant attempted to prevent or dissuade the victim from reporting the attack to the police other than by appellant's threat to the victim. Where, as here, the evidence would not justify a conviction of the lesser included offense, the court had no sua sponte obligation to instruct the jury on that offense. " ( Brenner, supra, 5 Cal.App.4th at p. 341.)