Question: After drinking for many hours, a very drunk man encountered another man in a convenience store and asked him for five dollars. The customer refused, and the drunk man knocked him down and began beating his head against the floor. The drunk man woke up hours later in jail, with no memory of the events. The police charged him with aggravated assault, which required proof of specific intent. At trial, the drunk man asked for an additional jury charge of simple assault, which did not require specific intent. The trial court refused, and the drunk man was convicted of aggravated assault. On appeal, will the appeals court likely reverse for a new trial, ordering that a charge on simple assault be added?
A: Yes, because the lesser included crime must always be a part of the jury charge in order to allow the jury to pick and choose whichever crime it feels applies.
B: Yes, because the evidence of voluntary intoxication could rule out a finding of specific intent, and therefore the jury should have the choice of each crime before it.
C: No, because voluntary intoxication is no defense to crime.
D: No, because the violent force of beating his head on the ground would preclude a simple assault charge as a matter of law.
Please eliminate two incorrect options first, then think it step by step and choose the most proper one option.