The absence of a testifying victim is significant, but it is not an automatic dismissal and anyone who tells you otherwise is getting ahead of the facts.
Here is what actually matters in this situation.
Prosecutors have tools available that do not require victim cooperation. If law enforcement documented the scene, took photographs, collected medical records, recorded statements at the time of the incident, or gathered witness accounts from neighbors or bystanders, that evidence can be presented without the victim on the stand. Some jurisdictions also pursue what is called victimless prosecution, building a case entirely on physical and documentary evidence. Whether the DA in this county has the appetite and the evidence to go that route is something only the defense attorney can assess after reviewing discovery.
The prior aggravated battery conviction from ten years ago complicates things even without being directly charged. Prosecutors can reference prior conduct to establish pattern, and a judge or jury hearing about a second aggravated battery will have that context whether it is formally introduced or not. The domestic incident from the prior month, even without charges filed, may also surface depending on how the prosecution builds their case.
That said, victim non-appearance genuinely does reduce the prosecution's leverage. Cases without cooperating witnesses are harder to win, and prosecutors know it. That reality often creates room for a negotiated resolution, a reduced charge, a plea to a lesser offense, or in some cases a dismissal if the evidence simply is not there to proceed.
The defense attorney needs to be pushing hard on what evidence exists beyond the victim's testimony before any decisions are made about how to proceed.