De'Mon v. State

A jury found Ryan Frank De’Mon guilty of two counts of aggravated assault with intent to rape two women. On appeal, De’Mon challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting one of his aggravated assault convictions and several evidentiary rulings. He also asserts the trial court improperly instructed the jury regarding similar transaction evidence. De’Mon further contends the trial court should have granted his request to charge the jury on the lesser crimes of sexual battery and attempted rape. Finally, De’Mon alleges his trial counsel was ineffective. For reasons that follow, we affirm. 1. In reviewing a defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we construe the evidence in a light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence.1 Moreover, we do not weigh the evidence or assess witness credibility, but determine whether a rational trier of fact could have found all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.2

Applying this standard, the evidence shows that the first victim, J. T., worked as a real estate agent at a Cobb County subdivision that was under construction. On June 10, 1999, J. T. was alone in the model home when De’Mon entered and said that he was meeting his mother there. He then asked to see the model home. J. T. allowed De’Mon to tour the house, but did not accompany him.