Damerius Kashon Hart v. State of Florida

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 24, 2026
Docket6D2024-1345
StatusPublished

This text of Damerius Kashon Hart v. State of Florida (Damerius Kashon Hart v. State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Damerius Kashon Hart v. State of Florida, (Fla. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

Case No. 6D2024-1345 Lower Tribunal No. 2022CF003270 _____________________________

DAMERIUS KASHON HART,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee. _____________________________

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County. Keith A. Carsten, Judge.

April 24, 2026

PER CURIAM.

Damerius Kashon Hart appeals his judgment and sentence after a jury found

him guilty as charged of two counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child between

the ages of twelve and sixteen. Hart’s challenge to the trial court’s imposition of

extradition costs is meritless because such imposition is authorized by Florida law.

See § 938.27(1), Fla. Stat. (2022) (“In all criminal . . . cases, convicted persons are

liable for payment of the costs of prosecution, including investigative costs incurred

by law enforcement agencies, . . . if requested by such agencies. The court shall include these costs in every judgment rendered against the convicted person.”); Bass

v. State, 873 So. 2d 569, 570 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (recognizing that extradition costs

are costs of prosecution authorized under section 938.27(1)). Because the trial

court’s imposition of $4,025 is described as “Cost of Extradition,” it is not rendered

invalid by the erroneous reference to section 941.06 as “Statutory Authority.” 1 See

Redman v. State, 412 So. 3d 201, 203 (Fla. 6th DCA 2025) (explaining that a trial

court is not required to cite a specific statute for an assessment, if it provides the

amount and description of the assessment). We reject Hart’s other arguments on

appeal without further discussion.

AFFIRMED.

STARGEL, WHITE and KAMOUTSAS, JJ., concur.

Robert David Malove and Hani Demetrious, of The Law Office of Robert David Malove, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Richard A. Pallas, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED

1 To avoid this issue in the future, we suggest that the scrivener’s error on the form be corrected to refer to section 938.27 as “Statutory Authority” for “Cost of Extradition.” 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Bass v. State
873 So. 2d 569 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Damerius Kashon Hart v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/damerius-kashon-hart-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2026.