What if the prosecutor had committed misconduct by failing to provide evidence to the jury?

Even if the prosecutor had committed misconduct, the error would have been harmless. First, the jury was instructed: "You must decide what the facts are. It is up to you exclusively to decide what happened, based only on the evidence that has been presented to you in this trial. [] . . . [] You must decide what the facts are in this case. You must use only the evidence that was presented in this courtroom or during the jury view. [] . . . Nothing that the attorneys say is evidence. In their opening statements and closing arguments, the attorneys discuss the case, but their remarks are not evidence." As a reviewing court, we presume the jury relied on the instructions, not the arguments of counsel, in reaching its verdict. (People v. Morales (2001) 25 Cal.4th 34, 47.)