Does a jury get instructions on the special circumstance of murder in the commission of a robbery that state that intent does not matter?

Although we agree with defendant that he was entitled to instructions on the special circumstance of murder in the commission of a robbery that apprised the jury of all of the findings required by section 190.2 as it read at the time of the offense, we conclude that the trial court's error was harmless since the jury necessarily made these findings implicitly in reaching the verdict that it did. (See People v. Sedeno (1974) 10 Cal.3d 703, 721, 112 Cal.Rptr. 1, 518 P.2d 913; People v. Tanner, (1979) 95 Cal.App.3d 948, 956-957, 157 Cal.Rptr. 465 [erroneous instruction that intent did not matter for crime of arson was harmless since first degree murder verdicts showed finding of specific intent].)