The opinion
WOODLEY, Presiding Judge,
dissenting.
As I understand the evidence, it is sufficient to sustain a conviction for robbery by putting in fear, such as we affirmed in Barber v. State, 158 Texas Cr. Rep. 561 , 258 S.W. 2d 87 .
In Horn v. State, 89 Texas Cr. Rep. 220 , 230 S.W. 693 , all elements of robbery save that of putting in fear of life or bodily *138 injury were withdrawn by the court in his charge. Paraphrasing language used by Judge Hawkins, in the opinion affirming Horn’s conviction: Why did these elderly ladies give up their $15,000.00? Was it because they liked appellant and his companions and wanted to display their generosity? Or was it because of their appearance under the circumstances, and their conduct after they got on the scene?
Quoting from Judge Hawkins:
“Where the indictment alleges the robbery to have been effected by fear of life or bodily injury, the burden is of course on the state to prove it; but ‘fear’ in this connection does not mean a panic of fright to the extent of losing one’s senses or control. The party robbed may not be ‘scared’ to the extent that he is hysterical. If he feels that if he complies with the request of the robber to surrender his property, there is no danger imminent to him, in a sense he might not be scared; yet, if under the circumstances and conditions surrounding the transaction he has a reasonable belief that he may suffer injury unless he does comply with the robber’s request, the ‘fear’ required by the law is present.”