Does the use of force or fear to escape and otherwise retain even temporary possession of property constitute robbery?

Alcantar argues the third sentence of special instruction #1 ("the use of force or fear to escape and otherwise retain even temporary possession of the property constitutes robbery") is ambiguous because "[i]t is unclear what 'otherwise retain' means in relation to escape, which of course is the only circumstance that would escalate the theft to a robbery." We disagree. While a robbery continues until the robber reaches a place of temporary safety, its commission does not require the robber to escape with the property. (People v. Pham (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 61, 65-68.)