Damon Christopher Depew v. State of Florida
This text of Damon Christopher Depew v. State of Florida (Damon Christopher Depew 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.
Opinion
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
Case No. 5D2025-0396 L.T. Case No. 05-2022-CF-10071-A _____________________________
DAMON CHRISTOPHER DEPEW,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee. _____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County. Charles Grooms Crawford, Judge.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Victoria Rose Cordero, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Tabitha Mills, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
January 2, 2026
PER CURIAM.
Damon Depew appeals an order of restitution stemming from an adjudication of guilt for battery in 2022. During the hearing to establish the amount of restitution, the victim gave testimony that described a series of hospital visits that she asserted related back to the battery. She also provided the medical records from her initial emergency room visit. No other witnesses testified, and no other medical records or bills were submitted. “It is axiomatic for purposes of determining the amount of restitution to a victim for medical expenses incurred or to be incurred that the victim’s testimony must be corroborated with billing records.” Boone v. State, 112 So. 3d 676, 677 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). Here, the State did not submit copies of any of the medical bills at the restitution hearing and only presented the victim’s uncorroborated testimony. The State appropriately concedes that the amount of the restitution order was therefore in error and that Appellant is entitled to a new restitution hearing where the victim can present medical bills for past medical expenses. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new restitution hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
JAY, C.J., and HARRIS and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Damon Christopher Depew v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/damon-christopher-depew-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2026.