City of Miami Ticketing Appellate Hearing Summary - June 18, 2026
City of Miami Ticketing Appellate Hearing Summary - June 18, 2026
On June 18, 2026, the City of Miami held a ticketing appellate hearing presided over by Hearing Officer Darcy Siegel. The quasi-judicial proceeding allowed alleged violators to appeal civil violation notices issued by code enforcement inspectors. The hearing included 10 settled citations, three trial cases, several failures to appear, and one reset. Settlement amounts ranged from $50 to $250. In the three contested cases, fines of $350 each were imposed after the property owners were found guilty of illegal dumping.
Consent Calendar
- Settled Cases:
- 207 Northeast 59th Street (owner Aaron Goldstein, 5901 East Little Haiti LLC) – Excessive/loud noise after 11 p.m. (compiled April 22, 2026) – settled for $200.
- 893 Northeast 82nd Street (represented by attorney Olivia Webb, FL Bar #1050437) – Tree removal/trimming/root pruning without a permit – settled for $200.
- 893 Northeast 82nd Street (companion case) – Dumping/littering (compiled March 6, 2026) – settled for $250.
- 1001 Southwest 23rd Avenue (respondent Yermanacovas) – Dumping/littering (compiled March 12, 2026) – settled for $250.
- 1869 Southwest 15th Street (respondent Andre Aguero) – Dumping/littering – settled for $250.
- 1721 Northwest 36th Avenue (respondent Manuel Huerta) – Dumping/littering – settled for $100.
- 797 Northwest 55th Terrace (respondent Carla Martinez, owner of Jade International Realty LLC) – Dumping/littering – settled for $250.
- 1152 Northwest 58th Terrace (property of Carlos Javier Martinez, represented by Carla Martinez via power of attorney) – Dumping/littering (compiled April 15, 2026) – settled for $250.
- 4530 Northwest 12th Place – Tree removal/trimming/root pruning without a permit – settled for $100.
- 1800 Northwest First Avenue (respondent Andre Edwards, owner of Luxury Spaces Miami LLC) – Tree removal/trimming/root pruning without a permit – settled for $100.
- 7811 Northeast 10th Court (respondent Juan Diego Serna, owner of Casavad LLC) – Dumping/littering (compiled April 29, 2026) – settled for $250.
- 3513 Southwest Third Street (respondent Levon Valdez) – Dumping/littering – settled for $50.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments were made outside of the individual cases. All testimony was from alleged violators, property owners, and code enforcement inspectors as part of the hearings.
Discussion Items
- Case 1: 1650 Onaway Drive (Inspector McCartney) – Brian Demico pleaded not guilty to a citation for dumping/littering on the public right-of-way. The pile contained boxes with his address, as well as other debris. Demico argued that he had permission from the neighbor to place bulk waste on the neighbor’s swale, that the area was commonly used by multiple neighbors, and that the city had not communicated any prior warnings. Inspector McCartney testified that the pile was larger than allowed and that a neighborhood blitz had covered 150 homes, including Demico's, two weeks before the citation. Demico admitted the boxes were his but argued he had acted in good faith. The hearing officer upheld the violation, imposing a $350 fine (reduced from $525).
- Case 2: 1371 Northwest 60th Street (Inspector Mills) – Johnny Williams pleaded not guilty to a citation for dumping/littering. He testified that he had given clothes to a homeless person who then disposed of the boxes improperly. Williams stated he cleaned up the area the same day and tried to contact the inspector. Inspector Mills testified that the pile included household garbage and an Amazon box with Williams’ address. The hearing officer found the violation occurred despite the post‑citation cleanup, stating that the violation had already occurred. A $350 fine was imposed (reduced from $525).
- Case 3: 1025 Northeast 81st Street (Inspector Perkins) – Talia Cohen and Tamir Gedalia pleaded not guilty. They argued that strong winds (up to 17 mph) and a missed city trash pickup caused a box from their property to blow onto a neighbor’s swale, and that the box may have been moved by a neighbor walking a dog. Inspector Perkins testified that two boxes with their address were found in a pile of palm fronds several houses away. The hearing officer found the wind explanation unlikely for a cardboard box and imposed a $350 fine (reduced from $525).
- Procedural Matters:
- A reset was granted for page 65 (1070 Bellmead Island Drive) because a family friend appeared on behalf of the owner who had a family emergency. The case was reset without a hearing.
- Failures to appear were recorded for pages 61 (1285 Northwest 52nd Street), 77 (7879 Northeast Bay Shore Drive), and a case at 2144 Southwest 24th Street (page 11). The case at 2144 Southwest 24th Street was reset due to a lack of proper power of attorney. The owner of page 79 (address not specified) chose not to appear and will pay the ticket, resulting in a default verdict.
- Page 81 (address not specified) was marked as voided.
Key Outcomes
- Settlements: 10 cases were settled by agreement between the alleged violator and the city. The hearing officer approved the settlements, and signed orders were issued.
- Trials: All three trial cases resulted in findings of guilt; fines of $350 each were imposed (original fines were $525).
- Resets: One case was reset due to a family emergency (page 65). One case was reset due to lack of proper power of attorney (page 11).
- Failures to Appear: Three cases were marked as failures to appear (pages 61, 77, and 79). For page 79, the hearing officer noted the owner intended to pay the ticket, but the case was treated as a no‑show and the citation was upheld by default.
- Voided: One case (page 81) was voided.
- Next Steps: All parties were informed of their right to appeal the hearing officer's decision to the Miami‑Dade Circuit Court Appellate Division within 30 days of the order issuance.
Meeting Transcript
I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome you to the meeting of the City of Miami ticketing appellate hearing. My name is Darcy Siegel, and I am the hearing officer assigned to hear today's cases. It's required that all persons who are going to testify as to facts be placed under oath, including the code enforcement inspector. The code enforcement inspector and alleged violator will be placed under oath. But first, please rise and join me in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and then remain standing in order to be placed under oath. Thank you. Please remain standing so that you can be sworn in by the clerk. Do you solemnly swear affirmed that testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Please, Den, if you plan on translating from Spanish to English. Any translations? I have some opening remarks before we actually get started, so I'm going to read them and then we will start with the hearings. These are hearings conducted by the City of Miami hearing officer, the purpose of which are to give the alleged violators the opportunity to appeal the decision of the code enforcement inspector, which resulted in the issuance of a civil violation notice. These hearings are conducted in a quasi-judicial manner, and I am the hearing officer assigned to hear today's cases. That is, to hear the evidence in cases presented by the code enforcement inspectors, and then to hear the evidence presented by alleged violators. These hearings are open to the public. These hearings will not be conducted in accordance with the formal rules relating to evidence and witnesses. Any relevant evidence will be admitted if I find it to be competent and reliable, regardless of the existence of any common law or statutory rule to the contrary. All documentary evidence must be submitted for placement in the hearing file. No documentary evidence will be considered unless the alleged violator or code enforcement inspector submits a copy for the hearing file. Each party shall have the right to call and examine witnesses, to introduce exhibits, to cross-examine opposing witnesses on any matter relevant to the issues, even though that matter was not covered in the direct examination. It is my responsibility to make findings of fact based on the evidence of record. The fact-finding determinations of the hearing officer are limited to two. One, whether the violation alleged did occur, and secondly, if so, whether the person named in the civil violation notice can be held responsible for that violation. In order to make a finding upholding the code enforcement's decision, I must find that a preponderance of the evidence indicates that the alleged name violator was responsible for the violation of the relevant section of the code as charged. If I affirm the decision of the code enforcement inspector, my order will specify the amount of the civil penalty and the amount of the administrative costs of the hearing. The alleged violator or the city of Miami may seek to overturn the order of a hearing officer by appealing the order to the Miami Date Circuit Court Appellate Division within 30 days of the issuance of the order by the hearing officer. After the code enforcement inspector has presented his or her case and you have presented your case, I will consider the evidence and then render a decision. This concludes my opening remarks. We will now commence with the proceedings. Can you please state your name and address for the record? Aaron Goldstein 207 Northeast 59th Street. He's the owner. Okay. You're the owner of 5901 East Little Haiti LLC? Yes, ma'am. Okay. It appears that your property located at 207 Northeast 59th Street was cited by the City of Miami for excessive and/or loud noises audible after 11 p.m. from outdoors. The violation was complied back in April 22nd of 2026, but the civil citation remained unpaid. You had an opportunity to speak with the city this morning regarding this matter. Is that correct? For this particular case, yes. Yes. And after speaking with the city, you've agreed to uh settle this matter. Is that right? Yes, ma'am. And you agreed to settle it for $200? Yes, ma'am. And did you freely and voluntarily enter into that agreement with the city?
openpublica.com