What is the test for an aider and abettor's liability for criminal conduct?

^8. "[A]n aider and abettor's liability for criminal conduct is of two kinds. First, an aider and abettor with the necessary mental state is guilty of the intended crime. Second, under the natural and probable consequences doctrine, an aider and abettor is guilty not only of the intended crime, but also 'for any other offense that was a "natural and probable consequence" of the crime aided and abetted.' " (People v. McCoy (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1111, 1117.) In this case, the trial court instructed the jury regarding intended crimes (see CALCRIM No. 401), but not the natural and probable consequences doctrine (see CALCRIM No. 402). Accordingly, we do not address the latter. (See McCoy, at p. 1117.)