What is the test for a jury to convict a defendant of possessing methamphetamine with intent to sell?

We further conclude the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that defendant possessed the methamphetamine with the intent to sell. We note that " '[i]ntent is rarely susceptible of direct proof and usually must be inferred from the facts and circumstances surrounding the offense.' [Citation.] 'Evidence of a defendant's state of mind is almost inevitably circumstantial, but circumstantial evidence is as sufficient as direct evidence to support a conviction.' [Citation.]" (People v. Rios (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 542, 567-568; People v. Harris (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 371, 374 [intent to sell controlled substance may be established by circumstantial evidence].)