Damerius Kashon Hart v. State of Florida
Docket 6D2024-1345
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Florida
- Court
- District Court of Appeal of Florida
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 6D2024-1345
Appeal from a criminal judgment and sentence following jury convictions in the Circuit Court for Osceola County.
Summary
The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed Damerius Kashon Hart’s convictions and sentence for two counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child aged 12–16. Hart challenged the trial court’s imposition of $4,025 labeled as “Cost of Extradition.” The appellate court held that extradition costs are authorized prosecution costs under Florida law (section 938.27(1)) and therefore properly imposed, and that the erroneous statutory citation on the judgment form did not invalidate the assessment. The court rejected Hart’s remaining appellate arguments without discussion.
Issues Decided
- Whether the trial court properly imposed extradition costs of $4,025 as part of the judgment against the convicted defendant.
- Whether an erroneous statutory reference on the judgment form (to section 941.06) invalidates the assessment of extradition costs described as "Cost of Extradition."
Court's Reasoning
The court relied on section 938.27(1), which makes convicted persons liable for costs of prosecution, including investigative and extradition-related costs when requested by law enforcement. Prior precedent recognizes extradition costs as prosecution costs under that statute. Because the judgment explicitly stated the amount and described it as "Cost of Extradition," the mis-citation of a different statute on the form was a scrivener's error that did not defeat the substantive authority to assess the cost.
Authorities Cited
- Florida Statute § 938.27(1)§ 938.27(1), Fla. Stat. (2022)
- Bass v. State873 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Redman v. State412 So. 3d 201 (Fla. 6th DCA 2025)
Parties
- Appellant
- Damerius Kashon Hart
- Appellee
- State of Florida
- Judge
- Keith A. Carsten
- Attorney
- Robert David Malove
- Attorney
- Hani Demetrious
- Attorney
- James Uthmeier
- Attorney
- Richard A. Pallas, Jr.
Key Dates
- District Court Decision Date
- 2026-04-24
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider motion for rehearing
A motion for rehearing must be filed within the time allowed by court rules if the appellant believes there are grounds; note the opinion warns it is not final until rehearing time expires.
- 2
Seek further appeal if appropriate
If counsel believes there are preserveable issues, consider filing a petition for review to the Florida Supreme Court consistent with applicable deadlines and standards.
- 3
Comply with judgment costs
Prepare to satisfy the $4,025 extradition cost assessment unless successfully challenged through postconviction relief or other authorized proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide about the extradition cost?
- The court held that the $4,025 labeled "Cost of Extradition" is a permissible prosecution cost under Florida law and may be included in the judgment.
- Does a wrong statute citation on the judgment void the cost?
- No. The appellate court found the citation error was a scrivener's mistake and did not invalidate the cost so long as the amount and description were provided.
- Was Hart's conviction or sentence overturned on appeal?
- No. The Sixth District affirmed the convictions and sentence and rejected Hart's other arguments without further discussion.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- Hart is directly affected because he remains liable for the convictions, sentence, and the assessed extradition costs; other defendants may be affected insofar as the decision affirms that extradition costs can be assessed under section 938.27.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
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