DAMON CHRISTOPHER DEPEW
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Victim testimony regarding medical expenses incurred as a result of battery must be corroborated with billing records to establish the amount of restitution.
[1] Victim testimony regarding medical expenses incurred as a result of a crime must be corroborated with billing records to establish the amount of restitution ordered by th…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“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.”
Court stating the legal standard for establishing medical restitution amounts
Depew was adjudicated guilty of battery in 2022. At the restitution hearing, the victim testified about hospital visits related to the battery and pro…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
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.
2 “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. _____________________________