What is the test for a jury to determine whether a defendant acted with the proper mental state?

The given instruction explicitly focused the jury on defendant and instructed it to determine what defendant was aware of when he acted. If defendant's awareness included "facts that would lead a reasonable person to realize that his act by its nature would directly and probably result in the application of force to someone," then defendant acted with the requisite mental state. Like defendant's proposed pinpoint instruction, the given instruction correctly instructs the jury to determine defendant's knowledge of the facts before determining whether that knowledge met the objective component required. (See People v. Williams, supra, 26 Cal.4th at pp. 787-788 ["a defendant guilty of assault must be aware of the facts that would lead a reasonable person to realize that a battery would directly, naturally and probably result from his conduct. He may not be convicted based on facts he did not know but should have known"].)