Can a jury consider evidence of a defendant's voluntary intoxication?

Defendants argue that the voluntary intoxication instruction provided to the jury improperly limited the issues about which the jury could consider evidence of defendants' voluntary intoxication. "[T]he intent requirement for aiding and abetting liability is a 'required specific intent' for which evidence of voluntary intoxication is admissible" under section 29.4, subdivision (b). (People v. Mendoza (1998) 18 Cal.4th 1114, 1131; 29.4, subd. (b) ["Evidence of voluntary intoxication is admissible solely on the issue of whether or not the defendant actually formed a required specific intent."].)