Is there sufficient evidence to convict appellant of an attempted robbery?

Except for his confession, appellant contends the evidence is insufficient to show he intended to rob the liquor store and to support his conviction of attempted robbery. We disagree. Without his confession, the evidence of his conduct after he entered the store unmistakably supports the conclusion he intended to commit robbery, but was furstrated because the intended victim refused to cooperate. (See People v. Henderson, 255 Cal.App.2d 513, 517, 63 Cal.Rptr. 154.) Certainly the evidence was sufficient to establish the corpus delicti of the crime of attempted robbery and to permit receipt of his confession in evidence. (People v. McMonigle, 29 Cal.2d 730, 738, 177 P.2d 745.)