Does the instruction in CALCRIM No. 372 speak of flight immediately after the crime was committed?

Considering the instructions as a whole, we see no reasonable likelihood the jury applied the instruction as defendant suggests. (See People v. Tate (2010) 49 Cal.4th 635, 696.) As given, CALCRIM No. 372 spoke of flight "immediately" after the crime was committed. Jurors were aware defendant was found at the apartment complex shortly after the robbery and that he was cooperative with police, neither of which suggest absconding. More importantly, jurors were told it was up to them to decide what happened "based on the evidence that has been presented ... in this trial." (Italics added.) They were also instructed: "You must decide what the facts are in this case. You must use only the evidence that was presented in this courtroom. Evidence is the sworn testimony of witnesses, the exhibits admitted into evidence and anything else I told you to consider as evidence." (Italics added.)

Page 15