CAVE CREEK – Robert Kerkel finally walked away from court on Feb. 15 without the lingering threat of a 30-day jail sentence and $6,000 in fines.
Last month, Carefree/Cave Creek Consolidated Court Municipal Judge Stephanie Olohan gave Kerkel one more month to come into compliance with an October 2012 order issued by former Cave Creek Judge Pro Tem Deborah Weecks to abate the litter, junk motor vehicle storage, nuisance and maintenance of a non-permitted use of his property.
Kerkel was sentenced by Weecks to 30 days in jail, $6,000 in fines and two years of probation, all of which would be suspended once he came into compliance with her order.
Set for compliance review on April 17, 2013, rather than comply, Kerkel appealed, which stayed Weecks’ order as Kerkel exhausted his appeals options.
Kerkel moved onto his E. Galvin Street property in 1986 and purchased it in 1987.
Shortly after Kerkel moved in, his neighbor Zeita Pochos noticed he had been amassing junk vehicles and junk vehicle parts, which eventually encroached onto her property.
By 1990, Pochos was fed up and filed a complaint with the town.
The case was successfully prosecuted with the town prevailing on appeal. However, when the case was remanded back to the town for sentencing, for some reason it was referred to the town’s civil attorney instead of then Town Prosecutor Mark Iacovino and basically slipped through the cracks without any resolution.
As time went on, things only got worse with hoards of pack rats taking up residency in the junk vehicles which, in addition to being an eyesore, drew packs of coyotes to the neighborhood, endangering neighborhood pets.
Pochos subsequently filed a new complaint in Sept. 2011 and it became the last case adjudicated in Cave Creek before court consolidation with Carefree.
The town of Cave Creek appointed Iacovino as a special prosecutor to handle the appeals since he had successfully prosecuted the case at trial.
After Kerkel ran the gamut of appeals and the Arizona Supreme Court declined to review his case in May 2016, the case was remanded back to Olohan’s court for sentencing in July 2016.
Olohan repeatedly advised Kerkel that the court was legally obligated to impose the sentence ordered by Weecks and she could not deviate from the sentence imposed.
Olohan only extended the compliance dates to correspond with the same number of days as in Weecks’ original order.
When Kerkel appeared before Olohan on Jan. 11, 2017 for a compliance review hearing where, after much discussion, doubt was raised that Kerkel would ever come into compliance.
Iacovino said the Stein inspected the property on Jan. 6 and submitted Stein’s photos and a report of his findings to the court.
Iacovino said, “The bottom line is, Mr. Kerkel has made significant progress toward compliance but he’s not in compliance.”
Olohan reluctantly granted Kerkel a final 30-day extension to bring his property into compliance.
During the compliance review hearing on Feb. 15, Iacovino presented the court with an updated compliance inspection report prepared by Town Marshal Adam Stein.
While Stein indicated Kerkel was now in compliance, Iacovino told the court Pochos and two other neighbors told Iacovino before the hearing they disagreed with Stein’s assessment.
Another concern raised by the neighbors was if Kerkel is found to be in compliance, the case is closed and his probation terminates. They asked what would happen if Kerkel’s property reverted back to the same state.
Iacovino said it would be unfortunate but they would have to go down this same road again.
After reviewing Stein’s report, Olohan noted there were no vehicles in the U-shaped driveway, excess vehicles were removed and the bus was covered.
She said the 17 vehicles parked in the rear yard all have valid registrations, all started and run.
Stein said Kerkel was in compliance with the order and with the town’s ordinances.
Olohan, once again, stated she was bound by Weecks’ order.
She told Kerkel, “What I saw 30 days ago and what I see now – you’re in compliance.”
Reading Weecks’ order, Olohan told Kerkel, “The order indicates your probation ends today,” and encouraged him to keep his property in its current condition.
Olohan repeated she was bound by Weecks’ order and stated, “This case will be closed.”
