Cave Creek Municipal Court in need of improvements, study shows

By Philip HaldimanThe Republic | azcentral.comTue Oct 22, 2013 8:56 AM

A recent evaluation of Cave Creek’s Municipal Court revealed it has been operating under deficiencies.

The report was released in advance of an agreement this month between Cave Creek and Carefree to consolidate the towns’ courts. Under the plan, Carefree will serve as court administrator of a combined court that will be in Cave Creek.

The court assessment, produced by the Administrative Office of the Courts and released in September, found 14 areas in need of improvement.

The significant issues included a lack of judicial presence, with the magistrate at court as little as a few hours a week, as well as charging court costs without a local ordinance to authorize them.

The assessment also found that the court has not been submitting required statistical information to the Administrative Office of the Courts, including monthly case-activity reports, annual expenditure surveys, annual personnel surveys and quarterly revenue surveys.

Also, monthly remittance to the state was consistently delayed.

Former Magistrate Lianne Sefcovic, who began in January 2012, stepped down Aug. 1 to accept a full-time position in a private law firm.

Sefcovic could not be reached for comment.

Pro Tem Judge Lawrence Scaringelli is contracted to finish his term, through Dec. 19.

As a result of this and other recent turnover within the court, the AOC focused its assessment on a period beginning in July 2012.

Scaringelli has been working with the AOC to correct the concerns, most of which, he said, have been corrected.

Vice Mayor Adam Trenk said now that the courts have merged, Cave Creek can capitalize on the opportunity of a well-run Carefree court the community can benefit from.

“We have gotten rid of, or are getting rid of a court that was not being operated in compliance and probably to detriment of our community,” Trenk said. “(Problems) have been identified and we’ve taken measures to make improvements.”

Heather Murphy, director of communications for the Arizona Supreme Court, which oversees all courts in the state, said Cave Creek was not egregious in its operations, but the AOC did have some serious concerns.

The AOC provides support for the supervision and administration of all state courts, including operational reviews for individual courts about every 10 years.

The court has some significant issues, but a lot will be cured in the merger, or at least addressed, Murphy said.

“The report details limited judicial presence in Cave Creek,” she said. “The demands of the citizens require more presence.”

According to the report, “the court staff reported that the ‘judge would come to the court once per week (Wednesday mornings) to preside over court proceedings. Typically, the judge would arrive shortly before court began and leave the court shortly after court commenced.’ This schedule did not provide ample time for staff to confer with the judge on critical administrative issues such as staffing, procedures, and court system improvement.”

The merger will allow Cave Creek residents to have access to the court five days a week.

“That’s important access to justice, not just one or two days a week,” Murphy said.

Carefree Town Administrator Gary Neiss said the court merger will eliminate this problem for Cave Creek. He said the Carefree magistrate maintains daily office hours “to ensure the timely processing of paperwork which addresses the AOC report on the lack of presence/office hours from the Cave Creek Magistrate. The extensive training and experience of the Carefree staff should mitigate concerns.”

The Cave Creek court had also been determining court costs without a local ordinance to authorize costs, according to the report.

“Every fine, fee or ordinance, should have an origin, whether it is a state law or local law,” Murphy said. “It should have something it is tethered to.”

Court charges played heavily in the assessment of the Cave Creek court, at times overcharging customers and in other cases undercharging them.

“The court is inappropriately assessing monetary penalties. Specifically, the court assessed ‘Court Costs’ in the amount of $1,000 in one of five (20 percent) cases reviewed. However, the town of Cave Creek has not enacted an ordinance authorizing such costs to be assessed.”

The AOC report refers to past practices of Cave Creek charging unauthorized fees to artificially inflate the court’s revenue, Neiss said.

“Carefree maintains transparency in documenting the monthly workload of the court and providing an annual financial audit of the Court. This documentation will ensure that there is transparency and accountability,” he said.

Other concerns from the AOC:

Incorrectly issuing applicable warrants.

Issuing warrants that were not the correct warrant type based on the circumstances.

Issuing warrants long after 30 days of non-compliance, which is generally suggested business practice. In one instance, it took as long as 1,208 days to issue a warrant.

Unable to locate documents.

In 33 percent of applicable cases reviewed, finding of guilt was based on a trial to the court, when it was actually a result of the defendant’s guilty plea.

In 20 percent of DUI cases reviewed, the plea agreement was not signed by the prosecutor.

Not accurately reporting remittances to the local and state treasurers. For example, in September 2012, the town didn’t remit any money when proper amount was $456.

The court has incorrectly remitted monies to the state rather than the county. For example, the court remitted a total of about $520 to the state, rather than to Maricopa County, over the three-month period reviewed.

Not consistently submitting its state remittance reports on a timely basis. Specifically, monthly remittance reports were not submitted in four of the six months reviewed.

Lack of safe to store monies.