Jack W. Berryhill

Evaluation history

• 2008 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Gilpin · Gilpin

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  VotersRetained· 70.9% yes

  157,874 yes · 64,925 no50% needed to retain
  Reports: 2008 Retention Survey Report Need an accessible PDF Document version? Please click on the link below and email our staff Contact Us The First Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously and strongly recommends that Judge Jack W. Berryhill BE RETAINED, with one member absent. Background: Judge Berryhill was appointed to the First Judicial District Court in January, 2000. Before his appointment to the court, Judge Berryhill was a civil and commercial litigator in private practice for 25 years. His community interests include serving as a director of the Central City Opera Association and the Colorado Trial Foundation and by speaking to various community groups. He also has worked to improve the First Judicial District by working to implement several changes which have made the court more efficient and by updating and getting approval for new First Judicial District court rules. Strengths: Judge Berryhill exhibits many qualities of a fine judge: excellent writer of opinions that are clear and well reasoned, knowledge of the law, intelligent, prepared and fair. Most attorneys and non-attorneys feel his diligence and dignity make him very professional. In a survey of attorneys, 76% recommended retention. In a survey of non-attorneys such as jurors, witnesses and parties, 91% recommended approval. Weaknesses: One of Judge Berryhill’s weaknesses is that he is perceived as being inattentive to court proceedings when he is on his laptop taking notes; he will try to improve this problem with more frequent eye contact and questioning. Judge Berryhill often works long hours and on weekends; he is trying to balance this with vacations and trying to become more efficient. Recommendation: The Commission strongly recommends that Judge Berryhill BE RETAINED.
• 2002 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Gilpin · Gilpin

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  VotersRetained· 71.2% yes

  105,722 yes · 42,835 no50% needed to retain
  Retention Year: 2002 Recommendation: Retain Reports: 2002 Retention Survey Report Need an accessible PDF Document Version? Please click on the link below and email our staff Contact Us The First Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Jack W. Berryhill BE RETAINED. Judge Berryhill was appointed to the First Judicial District Court bench in January 2000. Prior to his appointment, Judge Berryhill practiced law in the Denver metro area, specializing in civil litigation. In the First Judicial District Court Judge Berryhill hears civil, domestic and criminal cases. The Commission was impressed by the judge’s willingness to become more proficient in the area of criminal law and by the development of his skills as a judge in the two years he has been on the bench. The Commission reviewed written evaluations of Judge Berryhill from attorneys and non-attorneys, including written verbatim comments attached to the evaluation questionnaires. The Commission also considered a written self-evaluation completed by Judge Berryhill and conducted a personal interview with the judge. Judge Berryhill believes it is vital for judges to be visible outside of their courtrooms. His community service covers a wide spectrum of activities. He is on the board of directors of the Central City Opera House; he has served on the Membership Council of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce; served on the committee of the First Judicial District Bar Association to improve judge-lawyer relations; teaches a one-day seminar for the International Practicum called "The Law and Folklore of Depositions" (this December will be his 20th year); serves on a board in his church; and speaks to many service clubs and local high school classes when possible. Attorneys surveyed recommended by 80% that Judge Berryhill be retained in office, 15% recommended that he not be retained and 5% had no opinion. Non-attorneys surveyed recommended by 92% that Judge Berryhill be retained in office, 5% recommended that he not be retained and 3% had no opinion.

Surveys & reports

• 2008 cycle
  • 2008 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
    Read full retention survey textexpandcollapse

    ## Page 1 State off Colorado LLogo COOMMISSIOON ON JUUDICIALL PERFORRMANCEE Jaacckk W.. BBeeryyhhiil 22008 Juudicial PPerformmance Suurvey ## Page 2 April 30, 2008 The Honorable Jack W. Berryhill Jefferson County Court & Admin. Facility 100 Jefferson County Pkwy. Golden, CO. 80401 Dear Judge Berryhill: Every two years the Colorado Judicial Performance Commission conducts a survey of people who have been in the courtroom of judges who face a retention vote in the next general election. The 2008 survey was conducted by Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc., who attempted to contact over 57,000 people statewide who had been in these courtrooms in one capacity or another. Over 12,400 people responded—3,084 to the attorney survey and 9,317 to the non-attorney survey. This report contains the results of those who were in your courtroom and who responded to the survey. In addition to this introduction, the report is divided into five main sections: • Attorney Results & Comments: This section contains graphs displaying the average grade you received overall (the combined average from questions 1a through 5e), each section and each question. Following the graphs, are a series of tables showing the percentage distribution of responses to each question. Attorney respondents were also asked to comment about your performance. These comments have been transcribed, and in some instances redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. A copy of the attorney questionnaire is at the back of this report. • Appellate Judges & Comments: New to the 2008 Judicial Performance Evaluation is a survey of Court of Appeals judges and Supreme Court justices regarding the overall performance of district judges. • Non-attorney Results & Comments: Similar to the Attorney section, this portion of the report contains graphs (again including the overall average of questions 1a through 5c on the non-attorney questionnaire), the percentage distribution of responses by non-attorneys to each substantive question in the survey. The non-attorney respondents were also asked to comment about your performance. Again, these comments have been transcribed, and in some instances redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. A copy of the non-attorney questionnaire is also at the back of this report. • Methodology: The third section of the report discusses the methodology of the survey. • Questionnaires: And the final section provides copies of the questionnaires that were used. 100 Arap ahoe, Suite One, Boulder, CO 80302 Phone 303.443.5300 Fax 303.447.9386 ## Page 3 TThe Honorabble Jack W. BBerryhill AApril, 30 20088 PPage 2 If you havve any questtions about tthe methodoology and hoow the surveey was coonducted, pllease feel freee to contactt me at 303-4443-5300 ext 1, and for anny other questions youu might have about the ssurvey pleasse call the Exxecutive Dirrector of the CColorado Juddicial Performmance Progrram, Jane Hoowell, at 3033-837-3665. Beest regards, Paaul A. Talmeey Prresident ennc: ## Page 4 AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 4422)) ## Page 5 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Overall and by Section 33..33 Overall Average 3.4 3.4 3.3 Q1. Overall Case 33.44 Management 3.4 3.3 Q2. Overall App & 3.4 Knowldge of Law 3.3 3.7 Q3. Overall 3.6 Communications 3.7 3.3 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.5 3.5 3.4 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.4 3.4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 AAvveerraaggee GGrraaddee Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 6 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Case Management 3.3 Q1. Overall Case Management 3.4 3.4 3.6 1a. Promptly making rulings 3.6 during trial 3.6 33.11 1b. Beginning court on time 3.6 3.5 3.3 1c. Allotting appropriate amount 3.4 of time for cases 3.4 3.2 1d. Keeping cases moving 3.4 according to schedule 3.5 3.4 1e. [Civil only] Assisting parties to 3.0 reach agreement 3.0 3.2 1f. Maintaining appropriate 3.5 control over proceedings 3.5 3.2 1g. Promptly ruling on pre-trial 3.3 motions 3.3 3.7 1h. Promptly issuing a decision 3.5 on the case after trial 3.5 3.3 1i. Setting reasonable schedules 3.3 for cases 33.44 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 7 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.3 Q2. Overall App & Knowldge of 3.4 LLaaww 3.3 3.2 2a. Basing decisions on evidence 3.3 and arguments 3.3 3.3 2b. Giving reasons for rulings 3.4 3.4 3.6 2c. [Civil only] Issuing written 3.2 findings of fact and law 3.2 3.0 2d. Willing to reconsider error in 3.0 ffaacctt oorr llaaww 2.9 3.3 2e. Having knowledge of relevant 3.4 substantive law 3.3 3.4 2f. Having knowledge of rules of 3.5 pprroocceedduurree aanndd eevviiddeennccee 3.4 3.3 2g. Being able to identify and 3.4 analyze relevant facts 3.4 2.6 2h. [Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences when the 3.3 circumstances are similar 3.3 3.2 2i. Willing to make decision without regard to possible 3.4 criticism 3.4 3.3 2j. Making decisions without fear 3.5 ooff bbeeiinngg aappppeeaalleedd 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 8 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Communications 3.7 Q3. Overall Communications 3.6 3.7 33.88 3a. Speaking clearly 3.7 3.7 3.6 3b. Making sure all participants 3.6 understand the proceedings 3.6 3.6 3c. Using understandable 3.7 language 3.7 3.6 3d. Providing written communications that are 3.3 clear, thorough and well reasoned 3.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 9 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Demeanor 3.3 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.5 3.5 3.5 4a. Giving proceedings a sense 3.5 of dignity 3.5 3.1 4b. Treating everyone involved 3.4 politely 33.44 3.0 4c. Having empathy with the 3.3 parties involved 3.3 3.1 4d. Treating participants with 3.4 respect 3.5 3.1 4e. Presenting a neutral 3.4 presence on the bench 3.4 3.1 4f. Being consistent in [his/her] 3.4 behavior 3.5 33.11 4g. Conducting [his/her] 3.4 courtroom in a neutral manner 3.4 3.4 4h. Giving all participants an 3.5 opportunity to be heard 3.6 3.3 44ii. CCoonnssiisstteennttllyy aappppllyyiinngg llaawwss 3.4 and rules 3.4 3.8 4j. Not engaging in ex parte 3.7 communications 3.7 3.5 44kk. TTrreeaattiinngg pprroo ssee ppaarrttiieess ffaaiirrllyy 33.77 3.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 10 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Diligence 3.4 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.4 3.4 3.2 55aa. MMaakkiinngg ttoouugghh ddeecciissiioonnss wwhheenn 3.4 necessary 3.4 3.2 5b. Using good judgment in apppplication of relevant law and 3.3 rules 3.3 3.5 5c. Doing the necessary 'homework' and being prepared 3.4 for [[his/her]] cases 3.4 3.3 5d. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are 3.5 complicated and time consuming 33.55 3.3 5e. Providing prompt access to 3.5 the court in emergency matters 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 11 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Q6. Average: How biased do you think Judge Berryhill is toward the defense or prosecution? Jack W. Berryyhill -0.8 All District Judges 0.4 All Trial Judges 0.7 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 (cid:205)Defense Prosecution (cid:206) Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 12 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Q7. Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Berryhill's sentences? Jack W. Berryhill -1.9 All District Judges 0.1 All Trial Judges 0.3 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 (cid:205)Lenient Harsh (cid:206) Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 13 Jack W. Berryhill AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Retention Recommendation 110000%% 90% 80% 77%77% 7744%%7744%% 7733%% 71% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 13% 13% 13%13% 12% 12% 10% 10% 10% 6%6% 6%6% 5% 5% 4%4% 4%4% 4%4% 22%% 0% Including Undecided Excluding Undecided Judge Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 14 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Promptly making rulings during trial?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 59% 59% 57% B 20% 17% 18% C 5% 3% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 17% 19% 21% Average 3.6 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 15 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 49% 66% 62% B 20% 23% 25% C 22% 5% 7% D 7% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 3% 2% Average 3.1 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 16 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Allotting appropriate amount of time for cases?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 49% 55% 56% B 29% 27% 28% C 12% 9% 8% D 5% 3% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 5% 5% 4% Average 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 17 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Keeping cases moving according to schedule?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 49% 58% 58% B 22% 27% 28% C 15% 7% 7% D 7% 3% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 7% 4% 4% Average 3.2 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 18 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "[Civil only] Assisting parties to reach agreement?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 25% 23% 23% B 11% 17% 17% C 7% 10% 8% D 0% 4% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 57% 44% 47% Average 3.4 3.0 3.0 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 19 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1f. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 51% 64% 66% B 20% 22% 22% C 17% 8% 7% D 7% 3% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 5% 2% 2% Average 3.2 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 20 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1g. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 32% 45% 44% B 29% 23% 21% C 10% 9% 8% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 1% No Grade 27% 19% 24% Average 3.2 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 21 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1h. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 53% 48% 48% B 18% 17% 16% C 3% 5% 4% D 0% 2% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 28% 27% 29% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 22 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1i. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 44% 53% 54% B 24% 26% 26% C 12% 9% 8% D 5% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 15% 7% 8% Average 3.3 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 23 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Basing decisions on evidence and arguments?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 49% 54% 54% B 22% 25% 25% C 7% 9% 9% D 7% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% 3% No Grade 12% 5% 5% Average 3.2 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 10 ## Page 24 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 54% 57% 56% B 15% 25% 25% C 10% 9% 9% D 7% 3% 4% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 15% 4% 4% Average 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 11 ## Page 25 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "[Civil only] Issuing written findings of fact and law?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 32% 32% 27% B 11% 18% 16% C 4% 7% 6% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 1% 2% No Grade 54% 38% 47% Average 3.6 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 12 ## Page 26 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Willing to reconsider error in fact or law?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 29% 27% 27% B 5% 18% 18% C 15% 9% 9% D 5% 4% 5% Fail 2% 4% 4% No Grade 44% 37% 38% Average 3.0 3.0 2.9 Letter Grade B B B- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 13 ## Page 27 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Having knowledge of relevant substantive law?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 58% 55% 54% B 18% 28% 28% C 13% 9% 9% D 8% 3% 4% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 5% 3% 4% Average 3.3 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 14 ## Page 28 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Having knowledge of rules of procedure and evidence?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 63% 63% 60% B 12% 23% 24% C 15% 7% 8% D 7% 2% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 3% 4% Average 3.4 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 15 ## Page 29 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 51% 58% 58% B 22% 24% 24% C 15% 9% 8% D 5% 3% 4% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 7% 4% 4% Average 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 16 ## Page 30 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2h. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "[Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 14% 28% 36% B 25% 16% 18% C 14% 5% 5% D 14% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 1% No Grade 32% 48% 37% Average 2.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade C+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 17 ## Page 31 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2i. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible criticism?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 44% 54% 54% B 24% 20% 20% C 12% 7% 7% D 5% 2% 3% Fail 2% 2% 3% No Grade 12% 15% 14% Average 3.2 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 18 ## Page 32 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2j. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Making decisions without fear of being appealed?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 49% 55% 55% B 22% 19% 20% C 10% 6% 6% D 5% 2% 2% Fail 2% 1% 1% No Grade 12% 17% 16% Average 3.3 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 19 ## Page 33 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Speaking clearly?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 79% 75% 76% B 21% 18% 18% C 0% 4% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 0% No Grade 0% 1% 1% Average 3.8 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 20 ## Page 34 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Making sure all participants understand the proceedings?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 67% 71% 71% B 26% 20% 21% C 5% 5% 5% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average 3.6 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 21 ## Page 35 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Using understandable language?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 67% 75% 76% B 31% 20% 19% C 2% 4% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 0% No Grade 0% 1% 1% Average 3.6 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade B+ A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 22 ## Page 36 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 3d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Providing written communications that are clear, thorough and well reasoned?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 58% 46% 46% B 17% 21% 21% C 8% 7% 7% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 17% 20% 21% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 23 ## Page 37 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 69% 69% 69% B 14% 19% 20% C 10% 6% 6% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 5% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 1% 1% Average 3.5 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 24 ## Page 38 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Treating everyone involved politely?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 62% 68% 69% B 12% 16% 17% C 7% 7% 7% D 10% 3% 3% Fail 7% 4% 4% No Grade 2% 1% 1% Average 3.1 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 25 ## Page 39 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Having empathy with the parties involved?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 48% 55% 55% B 17% 22% 22% C 14% 10% 10% D 10% 4% 4% Fail 5% 4% 4% No Grade 7% 5% 4% Average 3.0 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 26 ## Page 40 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Treating participants with respect?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 57% 67% 68% B 17% 17% 18% C 5% 8% 7% D 17% 4% 3% Fail 2% 3% 3% No Grade 2% 1% 1% Average 3.1 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 27 ## Page 41 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Presenting a neutral presence on the bench?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 55% 65% 64% B 19% 19% 20% C 14% 8% 8% D 5% 4% 4% Fail 7% 4% 4% No Grade 0% 2% 1% Average 3.1 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 28 ## Page 42 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4f. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Being consistent in [his/her] behavior?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 57% 64% 64% B 14% 20% 21% C 14% 7% 7% D 7% 3% 3% Fail 5% 3% 2% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.1 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 29 ## Page 43 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4g. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Conducting [his/her] courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 55% 65% 64% B 19% 18% 20% C 17% 7% 7% D 5% 3% 4% Fail 5% 3% 3% No Grade 0% 3% 2% Average 3.1 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 30 ## Page 44 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4h. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Giving all participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 62% 70% 70% B 17% 18% 19% C 12% 6% 6% D 7% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 2% 1% Average 3.4 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 31 ## Page 45 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4i. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Consistently applying laws and rules?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 48% 59% 59% B 29% 21% 21% C 14% 8% 8% D 5% 3% 3% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 5% 6% 6% Average 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 32 ## Page 46 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4j. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Not engaging in ex parte communications?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 64% 67% 64% B 7% 10% 12% C 2% 2% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 26% 19% 19% Average 3.8 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 33 ## Page 47 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4k. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Treating pro se parties fairly?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 33% 47% 51% B 10% 9% 11% C 7% 3% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 50% 40% 33% Average 3.5 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade B+ A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 34 ## Page 48 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Making tough decisions when necessary?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 48% 55% 53% B 19% 21% 22% C 10% 7% 7% D 10% 3% 3% Fail 0% 1% 2% No Grade 14% 12% 13% Average 3.2 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 35 ## Page 49 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Using good judgment in application of relevant law and rules?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 50% 53% 54% B 21% 26% 26% C 10% 10% 9% D 7% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% 3% No Grade 10% 4% 4% Average 3.2 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 36 ## Page 50 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Doing the necessary 'homework' and being prepared for [his/her] cases?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 50% 58% 56% B 31% 24% 24% C 2% 7% 8% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 14% 6% 9% Average 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 37 ## Page 51 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time consuming?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 43% 56% 54% B 19% 18% 18% C 7% 5% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 2% 1% 2% No Grade 26% 17% 19% Average 3.3 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 38 ## Page 52 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Providing prompt access to the court in emergency matters?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 29% 40% 39% B 12% 13% 14% C 7% 5% 4% D 2% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 50% 40% 40% Average 3.3 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 39 ## Page 53 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Berryhill is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 6% 2% 3% ⇑ 4 0% 3% 4% 3 6% 6% 7% 2 0% 9% 10% 1 11% 13% 14% 0 Neutral 39% 54% 53% -1 0% 6% 4% -2 11% 3% 2% -3 6% 2% 2% -4 17% 2% 1% ⇓ -5 6% 1% 0% Average -0.8 0.4 0.7 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 40 ## Page 54 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Berryhill are? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 0% 2% 2% ⇑ 4 0% 3% 3% 3 6% 4% 4% 2 0% 7% 8% 1 6% 8% 10% 0 Appropriate 33% 56% 60% -1 6% 5% 4% -2 6% 5% 3% -3 6% 5% 3% -4 17% 2% 1% ⇓ -5 22% 2% 1% Average -1.9 0.1 0.3 hsraH oT thgiL oT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 41 ## Page 55 Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Berryhill be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 Strongly Recommend 73% 77% 77% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 5% 13% 13% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 13% 4% 4% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 10% 6% 6% Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 42 ## Page 56 AAppppeellllaattee JJuuddggee SSuurrvveeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 2200)) ## Page 57 Jack W. Berryhill Appellate Survey Overall Performance of Judge Berryhill Judge All District Berryhill Judges A 40% 28% B 20% 14% C 5% 3% D 0% 0% Fail 0% 0% No Grade 35% 55% Average 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 58 NNoonn--AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 9988)) ## Page 59 Jack W. Berryhill NNoonn-AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Overall and by Section 3.7 Overall Average 3.6 3.6 3.7 QQ11. OOvveerraallll DDeemmeeaannoorr 33.66 3.6 3.7 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.6 3.6 3.8 Q3. Overall 3.7 Communications 3.7 3.6 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.6 3.6 3.7 Q5. Overall Application of 3.6 Law 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 AAverage GGradde Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 60 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Demeanor 3.7 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.6 3.6 33.77 1a. Giving court proceedings a 3.7 sense of dignity 3.6 3.7 1b. Treating participants politely 3.7 and with respect 3.6 3.7 1c. Conducting [his/her] 3.6 courtroom in a neutral manner 3.6 3.7 1d. Having a sense of compassion and human 3.6 understanding for those who appear before the judge 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 61 Jack W. Berryhill NNoonn-AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Fairness 3.7 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.6 3.6 3.8 2a. Giving participants an 3.7 opportunity to be heard 3.6 3.7 2b. Treating those involved with 3.6 the case without bias 3.5 3.7 2c. Treating fairly people who 3.6 represent themselves 3.5 3.8 2d. Giving each side enough 3.7 time to present his or her case 33.66 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 62 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Communications 3.8 Q3. Overall Communications 3.7 3.7 3.8 3a. Making sure all participants understand the 3.7 proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom 3.6 3.8 3b. Using language that 3.7 everyone can understand 3.7 3.8 3c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can 3.7 hear what's being said 3.7 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 63 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Diligence 3.6 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.6 3.6 3.5 44a. BBegiinniing courtt on ttiime 33.55 3.4 3.8 4b. Maintaining appropriate 33..77 conttroll over proceeddiings 3.7 3.7 4c. Setting reasonable 3.6 sscchheedduulleess ffoorr ccaasseess 3.6 3.7 4d. Being prepared for [his/her] 3.7 cases 3.6 3.6 4e. Managing court proceedings so that there is 3.5 little wasted time 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 64 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.7 Q5. Overall App of Law 3.6 3.5 3.7 5a. Giving reasons for rulings 3.6 3.5 3.7 5b. Willing to make decision without regard to possible 3.6 outside pressure 3.5 3.6 5c. Being able to identify and 3.6 analyze relevant facts 33.55 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jack W. Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 65 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey Average: How biased do you think Judge Berryhill is toward the defense or prosecution? Jack W. Berryhill 0.0 All District Judges 0.1 All Trial Judges 0.1 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 (cid:205) Defense Prosecution (cid:206) Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 66 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Berryhill's sentences? Jack W. Berryyhill -0.1 All District Judges 0.0 All Trial Judges 0.0 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 (cid:205) Lenient Harsh (cid:206) Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 67 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 100% 91% 90% 87% 87% 85% 81% 80% 78% 70% 60% 5500%% 40% 30% 20% 10% 8% 8% 7% 7%7% 7% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2%2% 2%2% 1% 1% 0% Including Undecided Excluding Undecided Judge Berryhill All District Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 68 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 83% 76% 73% B 12% 16% 18% C 1% 3% 4% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 2% 1% 2% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.7 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 69 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Treating participants politely and with respect?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 85% 79% 76% B 9% 13% 14% C 2% 4% 4% D 0% 1% 2% Fail 3% 2% 3% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.7 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 70 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Conducting [his/her] courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 83% 77% 74% B 12% 13% 14% C 1% 4% 5% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 3% 2% 3% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 71 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Having a sense of compassion and human understanding for those who appear before the judge?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 80% 71% 69% B 13% 17% 17% C 1% 4% 5% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% 4% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 72 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Giving participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 86% 77% 75% B 8% 14% 14% C 1% 4% 4% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 3% No Grade 1% 2% 2% Average 3.8 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 73 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Treating those involved in the case without bias?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 75% 73% B 12% 14% 14% C 2% 3% 4% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% 4% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 74 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Treating fairly people who represent themselves?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 52% 47% 49% B 6% 8% 9% C 1% 2% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 2% 2% 3% No Grade 39% 39% 35% Average 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 75 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Giving each side enough time to present his or her case?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 75% 72% B 11% 14% 14% C 2% 3% 4% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 3% No Grade 2% 5% 5% Average 3.8 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 76 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Making sure participants understand the proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 85% 78% 76% B 9% 13% 14% C 2% 4% 5% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 2% 1% 2% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average 3.8 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 77 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Using language that everyone can understand?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 87% 78% 76% B 10% 16% 16% C 1% 4% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% 1% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.8 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 10 ## Page 78 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear what's being said?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 85% 79% 78% B 12% 14% 14% C 0% 4% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 2% 1% 1% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.8 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 11 ## Page 79 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 64% 61% 61% B 22% 24% 24% C 10% 7% 8% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.5 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 12 ## Page 80 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 85% 78% 77% B 10% 15% 15% C 2% 4% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 2% 1% 1% No Grade 1% 2% 2% Average 3.8 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 13 ## Page 81 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 72% 64% 62% B 11% 17% 17% C 3% 5% 5% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 11% 12% 13% Average 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 14 ## Page 82 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Being prepared for [his/her] cases?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 80% 73% 71% B 9% 14% 14% C 2% 3% 4% D 1% 1% 1% Fail 3% 2% 2% No Grade 4% 7% 8% Average 3.7 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 15 ## Page 83 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted time?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 68% 67% 66% B 22% 21% 20% C 5% 6% 7% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 3% 3% Average 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 16 ## Page 84 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 78% 67% 65% B 14% 16% 16% C 2% 4% 5% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 3% No Grade 3% 9% 9% Average 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 17 ## Page 85 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible outside pressure?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 69% 61% 59% B 9% 11% 12% C 2% 3% 4% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 2% 3% 3% No Grade 16% 20% 20% Average 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 18 ## Page 86 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 74% 68% 66% B 14% 13% 14% C 1% 3% 4% D 1% 2% 3% Fail 4% 3% 4% No Grade 5% 10% 10% Average 3.6 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 19 ## Page 87 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Berryhill is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 0% 1% 2% ⇑ 4 0% 1% 1% 3 1% 2% 2% 2 0% 2% 2% 1 9% 4% 5% 0 Neutral 85% 84% 82% -1 4% 2% 3% -2 0% 2% 1% -3 1% 1% 1% -4 0% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 0% 1% 1% Average 0.0 0.1 0.1 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 20 ## Page 88 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Berryhill are? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 0% 2% 2% ⇑ 4 2% 1% 2% 3 2% 2% 2% 2 2% 2% 2% 1 0% 3% 3% 0 Appropriate 84% 78% 76% -1 2% 5% 5% -2 5% 4% 4% -3 2% 2% 2% -4 2% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 0% 1% 1% Average -0.1 0.0 0.0 hsraH oT thgiL oT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 21 ## Page 89 Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Berryhill be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2006 Judges 2008 Strongly Recommend 91% 87% 85% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 4% 7% 8% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 1% 2% 2% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 3% 4% 5% Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 22 ## Page 90 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy ## Page 91 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy Sample: The databases of names and addresses of the people who had likely been in each judge’s courtroom were primarily provided by the Colorado Judicial Department, Colorado District Attorneys’ Council and the Denver County Courts. These three sources provided name and address data in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. Starting in the second quarter of 2007, the data was provided quarterly. Where there were low sample counts, this data was supplemented by contacting district court administrators for additional sample of particular types of potential respondents. The data was then combined, duplicates removed and addresses corrected— quarterly starting in 2007. Depending on the available number of names and the count of already received surveys for a particular judge, either all or a random sample of names were drawn. Included in the data cleaning was the identification of potential respondents in the sample who had appeared in more than two judges’ courtrooms. Due to concerns about respondent fatigue, no more than two questionnaires were intended to be sent to any one respondent—though there were a few instances where one respondent did receive more than two questionnaires. Where a person had been in more than two judges’ courtrooms, the selection criteria for which judges he or she would be sent questionnaires was generally: first, for the judge in whose courtroom the potential respondent had been in most often, and two, the judge with the smallest sample of the judges in whose courtroom the potential respondent had appeared. Survey: Each person whose name was drawn was mailed an initial postcard informing the recipient that he or she would be receiving a questionnaire. Two to three weeks after the post card was mailed, the potential respondent would be sent a personalized introductory letter and a questionnaire with a postage-paid return envelope. Those who did not respond to the first questionnaire were then sent a sent follow-up postcard. If the person did not respond after the follow-up postcard, a second questionnaire and letter were sent and in some instances a second follow-up postcard was sent after the second letter and questionnaire. In order to increase the number of attorney responses, particularly for judges with few attorney responses, telephone interviews were conducted with attorneys who had not responded to the mailed questionnaires. Over 900 interviews were completed by telephone. 1 ## Page 92 Questionnaire: The questionnaire used in the 2008 Judicial Performance Survey asked respondents to use a grade of A, B, C, D, or F (Fail) to assess the judge’s performance in five different areas. For attorney respondents these areas were Case Management, Application and Knowledge of Law, Communications, Demeanor and Diligence, and for non-attorney respondents the five were Demeanor, Fairness, Communications, Diligence and Application of Law. These scores were then converted to a numerical value where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. Copies of the questionnaires are included at the end of this report. Response: The estimated response rate is calculated as the number of completed questionnaires divided by the number of eligible respondents who actually received a questionnaire. The following table shows the total number of questionnaires mailed, completed, non-responses & refusals, undeliverables and other responses. The table presents the estimated overall response rate as well as the response rate by the different types of respondents. The true response rates are likely considerably higher than shown because of the relatively high percentage of people who were mailed questionnaires about judges who they had not observed in court. This is due, in part, to many cases being disposed of without the parties having appeared in court, as well as in the case of law enforcement, the data includes all those who were subpoenaed for a case, not just those who appeared. A similar table showing the response counts and estimated cooperation rate for your survey is provided at the end of this methodology section. 2 ## Page 93 Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Cooperation Sent Response Not Applicable responses Completes Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 841 306 93 2 440 58.8% Defense Attorneys 1,082 341 102 2 637 65.0% Other Attorneys Crmnl 809 418 27 3 361 46.2% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 1,395 312 171 13 899 73.4% Other Attorneys Civil 598 280 53 2 263 48.3% Attorneys, Unknown Role 852 289 77 2 484 62.5% Total Attorneys 5,577 1,946 523 24 3,084 61.0% Non-attorneys Criminal Law Enforcement 8,170 5,431 1,417 34 1,288 19.1% Defendant 13,787 9,091 3,737 25 934 9.3% Victim 295 222 63 2 8 3.4% Witness 1,886 1,342 453 5 86 6.0% Other 5,396 3,532 1,301 43 520 12.7% Civil Litigant 6,552 4,390 1,109 21 1,032 19.0% Witness 46 31 5 0 10 24.4% Other 59 29 15 0 15 34.1% Non-attnys, Unknown Role 5,065 2,598 1,843 12 612 19.0% Total Non-attorneys 41,256 26,666 9,943 142 4,505 14.4% Others Appellate Judges 26 6 0 0 20 76.9% Jurors 10,214 4,940 460 22 4,792 49.1% Total Other 10,240 4,946 460 22 4,812 49.2% Total 57,073 33,558 10,926 188 12,401 26.9% 3 ## Page 94 Results: The results of the Survey are in three main sections: Attorney respondents, Appellate Judge respondents and Non-attorney respondents. Within the Attorney and Non-attorney section are subsections of graphs displaying average grades for each section of the questionnaire and each question and tables showing the percentage distribution of grades. The Appellate Judge section is new this year, and shows the percentage distribution of the grades given by the appellate judges on overall performance. Graphs: The graphs visually display the overall average numerical grades received for all grade questions, each section and each question compared to averages for all district judges, and all trial judges for which 2008 surveys were conducted. Questions relating to bias toward the defense or prosecution, sentencing and retention recommendation are also graphed. Percentage Distribution of Grades: This section shows the percentage of each grade received on each question plus the bias, sentencing and retention questions. An average grade point for each graded question is computed and shown in the results section. A letter grade is also assigned to each grade point according to the following scale. A = 4.00 B = 3.00 to 3.33 C = 2.00 to 2.33 D = 1.00 to 1.33 A— = 3.67 to 3.99 B—= 2.67 to 2.99 C—= 1.67 to 1.99 D— = 0.67 to 0.99 B+ = 3.34 to 3.66 C+ = 2.34 to 2.66 D+ = 1.34 to 1.66 Fail = 0.00 to 0.66 This section also includes two comparative columns of results: one comparative column shows the results for that question for district judges surveyed in 2008, along with a second comparative column showing the results for all trial judges in the 2008 survey. Projectability: Most surveys seen by the public are surveys that are intended to be projectable, that is the results from the sample of people surveyed can be used to estimate a percentage or value of the population sampled with a known probability of error. For example, a pre-election poll of 500 likely Colorado voters is used to estimate the percentage of voters who will vote for Candidate A on election day, plus or minus some number of percentage points. The plus or minus amount is usually what is known as the 95%- confidence interval (the known probability of error), or what the media often refers to as the margin-of-error. The Colorado Judicial Performance Evaluation Survey is not projectable with a known probability of error because the results are calculated from a self- selecting sample that is self-selecting based on the content and subject matter of the survey. In other words, the potential respondent knows the purpose and content of the survey, and based on that, decides whether to respond to the survey. 4 ## Page 95 While projectability within a known probability of error is a highly desirable attribute of a survey, it is often not feasible to achieve. Commercial market research often uses nonprojectable (and small) samples—the most well known of which are for focus groups. Moreover, the federal courts have long accepted, and do not expect, projectable samples for market confusion surveys used in trademark litigation. In other words, one can still use the results of the Judicial Performance Evaluation Survey to estimate how everyone who has observed a judge in the courtroom would grade him or her, just not with a known probability of error. The Judicial Performance Evaluation Survey is a valuable means, perhaps the only practical means, for the Judicial Performance Commissions to have a summary of structured interviews with a number of people who have courtroom familiarity with the judge being evaluated, and who most often— albeit not always—are responding out of a desire to improve the performance of our state’s judicial system. 5 ## Page 96 Jack W. Berryhill Responses by Type Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Coop Role Type Sent Response Not Applicable Responses Completes Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 13 1 0 0 12 92.3% Defense Attorneys 7 3 0 0 4 57.1% Other Attorneys Criminal 11 8 0 0 3 27.3% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 24 4 4 0 16 80.0% Other Attorneys Civil 5 1 1 0 3 75.0% Attorneys, Unknown Role Type 5 1 0 0 4 80.0% Total Attorneys 65 18 5 0 42 30.0% Non-attorneys Criminal Law Enforcement 75 53 17 0 5 8.6% Defendant 163 87 69 0 7 7.4% Civil Litigant 53 35 6 0 12 25.5% Total Non-attorneys 291 175 92 0 24 87.9% Others Appellate Judges 26 6 0 0 20 76.9% Jurors 117 36 7 0 74 67.3% Total Others 143 42 7 0 94 30.9% Grand Total: 499 235 104 0 160 40.5% Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 97 QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirreess ## Page 98 Commission on Judicial Performance 10. And what would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s weaknesses? _ Attorney Questionnaire _ _ Evaluation of _ _ JUDGE [NAME] 11. Is there anything else that you would like to say about Judge [Last Name]? _ Using a grade scale, where an “A” is excellent along with B, C, D or F for fail, _ please grade the judge on the following. (If you feel that you don not have _ experience with the judge in a specific area, or just don’t know, please circle the _ number corresponding to “Don’t Know/Not Applicable”—DK/NS). _ DK 1. Case Management: A B C D F N/A 12. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how a. Promptly making rulings during trial. 4 3 2 1 0 9 strongly do you recommend that Judge [Last Name] be retained in office, or not retained in office? b. Beginning court on time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Allotting appropriate amount of time for cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Strongly recommend he be retained in office. 5 Somewhat recommend he be retained in office . 4 d. Keeping cases moving according to schedule. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation . 3 e. [Civil only]1 Assisting parties to reach agreement. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Somewhat recommend he not be retained in office . 2 f. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Strongly recommend he not be retained in office . 1 g. Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. 4 3 2 1 0 9 And why do you think that way about retaining or not retaining Judge [Last h. Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Name]? i. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ DK _ 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: A B C D F N/A _ a. Basing decisions on evidence and arguments. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ b. Giving reasons for rulings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ _ c. [Civil only]1 Issuing written findings of fact and law. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. 4 3 2 1 0 9 e. Having knowledge of relevant substantive law. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Thank you for your time in completing this questionnaire. f. Having knowledge of rules of procedure Please place it in the self-addressed, postage paid enveloped and evidence. 4 3 2 1 0 9 provided, and place it in the mail. Your participation in this g. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 4 3 2 1 0 9 survey is very much appreciated. h. [Criminal only]2 Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar. 4 3 2 1 0 9 i. Willing to make decisions without regard to possible criticism. 4 3 2 1 0 9 j. Making decisions without fear of being appealed . 4 3 2 1 0 9 DK 1 Please answer questions 1e & 2c only if you have observed the judge in a civil case. 2 Please answer question 2h only if you have observed the judge in a criminal case. ## Page 99 3. Communications: A B C D F N/A 6. [Criminal cases only] 1 On the scale below, please indicate by circling the a. Speaking clearly. 4 3 2 1 0 9 appropriate number how biased you think Judge [Last Name] is toward b. Makings sure all participants understand the defense or the prosecution. If you feel Judge [Last Name] is the proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 completely unbiased, circle “0.” c. Using understandable language. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Bias toward Completely Bias toward Defense Neutral Prosecution d. Providing written communications that are clear, thorough and well reasoned. 4 3 2 1 0 9 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 DK 7. [Criminal cases only]1 On the scale below, please indicate by circling the 4. Demeanor: A B C D F N/A appropriate number how lenient or how harsh you think the sentences a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 4 3 2 1 0 9 generally handed down by Judge [Last Name] are. If you feel Judge [Last b. Treating everyone involved politely. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Name] generally hands down appropriate sentences, circle “0.” c. Having empathy with the parties involved. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Sentences Appropriate Sentences d. Treating participants with respect. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Too Light Sentences Too Harsh e. Presenting a neutral presence on the bench. 4 3 2 1 0 9 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 f. Being consistent in his/her behavior 4 3 2 1 0 9 g. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Though your name will never be associated with your answers, because the judge will h. Giving all participants an opportunity to be heard. 4 3 2 1 0 9 see a typed transcript of the comments that you and others write, it is important that i. Consistently applying laws and rules. 4 3 2 1 0 9 you do not include information in the comments below that would unintentionally identify you as the author. j. Not engaging in ex parte communications 4 3 2 1 0 9 k. Treating pro se parties fairly. 4 3 2 1 0 9 8. If an associate were assigned to Judge [Last Name] in a case and asked you for advice, what would you say? DK ________________________________________________________ 5. Diligence: A B C D F N/A ________________________________________________________ a. Making tough decisions when necessary. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ________________________________________________________ b. Using good judgment in application of relevant ________________________________________________________ law and rules. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ________________________________________________________ c. Doing the necessary “homework” and being 9. What would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s strengths? prepared for his/her cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ___________________________________________________________ d. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even ___________________________________________________________ when they are complicated and time consuming. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ___________________________________________________________ e. Providing prompt access to the court ___________________________________________________________ in emergency matters. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ___________________________________________________________ [Continued on Back Page] {Question 3d is asked only regarding district judges.} 1 Please answer questions 6 & 7 only if you have observed the judge in a criminal case. ## Page 100 12. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how Commission on Judicial Performance strongly do you recommend that Judge [Last Name] be retained in office, or not retained in office? Strongly recommend he/she be retained in office ................................ 5 Evaluation of Somewhat recommend he/she be retained in office ............................ 4 JUDGE[NAME] Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation ............. 3 Somewhat recommend he/she not be retained in office ..................... 2 Strongly recommend he/she not be retained in office ......................... 1 Using a grade scale, where an “A” is excellent along with B, C, D or F for fail, please grade the judge on the following. (If you feel that you don’t have experience with the judge in a specific area, or just don’t know, please circle the And why do you think that way about retaining or not retaining Judge number corresponding to “Don’t Know/Not Applicable”—DK/NA). [Last Name]? _____________________________________________________________ DK _____________________________________________________________ 1. Demeanor: A B C D F N/A _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ a. Giving court proceedings a sense of dignity. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _____________________________________________________________ b. Treating participants in the case politely _____________________________________________________________ and with respect. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. Having a sense of compassion and human Thank you for you time in completing this questionnaire. Please understanding for those who appear place it in the self-addressed, postage paid enveloped provided, before him/her. 4 3 2 1 0 9 and place it in the mail. Your participation in this survey is very much appreciated. DK 2. Fairness: A B C D F N/A a. Giving participants an opportunity to be heard. 4 3 2 1 0 9 b. Treating those involved in the case without bias. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Treating fairly people who represent themselves. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. Giving each side enough time to present his or her case. 4 3 2 1 0 9 DK 3. Communications: A B C D F N/A a. Makings sure participants understand the proceedings, and what’s going on in the courtroom. 4 3 2 1 0 9 b. Using language that everyone can understand. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear what’s being said. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ## Page 101 DK Though your name will never be associated with your answers, because the judge will 4. Diligence: A B C D F N/A see a typed transcript of the comments that you and others write, it is important that a. Beginning court on time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 you do not include information in the comments below that would unintentionally identify you as the author. b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 8. If a friend of yours was scheduled to appear before Judge [Last Name] c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 as a party in either a civil or criminal case and asked you for advice, what d. Being prepared for his/her cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 would you tell your friend about Judge [Last Name] ? e. Managing court proceedings so that there is _ little wasted time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ _ _ DK _ 5. Application of Law: A B C D F N/A _ a. Giving reasons for rulings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 b. Willing to make decision without regard to 9. What would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s strengths? possible outside pressure. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ c. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ _ _ _ 6. [If you were in [Last Name]’s courtroom during a criminal case or _ cases please answer this question, otherwise skip to the next question.] On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate number how biased you think Judge [Last Name] is toward the defense or 10. And what would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s weaknesses? the prosecution. If you feel Judge [Last Name] is completely unbiased, _ circle “0.” _ _ Bias toward Completely Bias toward _ Defense Neutral Prosecution _ 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 _ 7. [If you were in [Last Name]’s courtroom during a criminal case or 11. Is there anything else that you would like to say about Judge cases please answer this question, otherwise skip to the next [Last Name] ? question.] On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate _ number how lenient or how harsh you think the sentences generally handed _ down by [Last Name] are. If you feel Judge [Last Name] generally hands _ down appropriate sentences, circle “0.” _ Sentences Appropriate Sentences _ Too Light Sentences Too Harsh _ 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Continued on Back Page
• 2002 cycle
  • 2002 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
    Read full retention survey textexpandcollapse

    ## Page 1 March 4, 2002 The Honorable Jack W. Berryhill Court Section 100 Jefferson County Parkway Golden, CO 80401-6002 Dear Judge Berryhill: Every two years the Colorado Judicial Performance Commission conducts a survey of people who have been in the courtroom of judges who face a retention vote in the next general election. The 2002 survey was conducted by Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc., who attempted to contact over 55,000 people who had been in these courtrooms in one capacity or another. Over 18,000 people responded—3,686 to the attorney survey and 14,925 to the non-attorney survey. This report contains the results of those who were in your courtroom and who responded to the survey. In addition to this introduction, the report is divided into four main sections: • Results: This section contains the average and percentage distribution of responses to each substantive numerical question in the survey. It is divided into two subsections, one for the results of the attorney survey and one for the results of the non-attorney survey. • Comments: Respondents were also asked to comment about each judge on each section of the questionnaire: courtesy, impartiality, communications skills, judicial temperament, diligence, application of the law, retention and general comments. These comments have been transcribed, and in some instances redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. Again this section has been divided into two subsections, one for attorney comments and one for non-attorney comments. • Methodology: The fourth section of the report discusses the methodology of the survey. • Questionnaires: And the final section provides copies of the questionnaires that were used. 100 Arap ahoe, Suite One, Boulder, CO 80302 Phone 303.443.5300 Fax 303.447.9386 ## Page 2 March 4, 2002 The Honorable Jack W. Berryhill Page 2 If you have any questions about the methodology and how the survey was conducted, please feel free to contact me at 303-443-5300, and for any other questions you might have about the survey please call the Director of the Colorado Judicial Performance Program, Michelle Stermer, at 303-837-3665. Best regards, Paul A. Talmey President enc: ## Page 3 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being courteous toward parties or witnesses? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 55% 65% 65% B 29% 20% 21% C 7% 6% 7% D 5% 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 3% 4% 3% Average Grade 3.3 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 1 ## Page 4 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being courteous toward attorneys? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 53% 60% 61% B 23% 22% 22% C 9% 8% 8% D 5% 4% 4% Fail 3% 3% 3% No Grade 7% 3% 3% Average Grade 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 2 ## Page 5 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being courteous toward pro se parties? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 40% 43% 48% B 21% 13% 14% C 3% 4% 6% D 1% 2% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 36% 37% 29% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 3 ## Page 6 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of race? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 52% 61% 63% B 17% 11% 12% C 1% 3% 3% D 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 29% 24% 19% Average Grade 3.7 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 4 ## Page 7 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of gender? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 57% 65% 66% B 11% 12% 14% C 5% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 8% 2% 2% No Grade 17% 14% 12% Average Grade 3.3 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 5 ## Page 8 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of age? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 60% 64% 66% B 19% 12% 13% C 1% 3% 4% D 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% 1% No Grade 19% 18% 15% Average Grade 3.7 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 6 ## Page 9 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of social/economic status? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 59% 64% 65% B 15% 12% 13% C 7% 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 20% 15% 13% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 7 ## Page 10 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being fair and impartial toward both sides? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 56% 61% 60% B 15% 17% 17% C 16% 8% 8% D 4% 4% 5% Fail 3% 4% 4% No Grade 7% 6% 5% Average Grade 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 8 ## Page 11 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating pro se parties fairly? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 45% 47% 51% B 9% 10% 11% C 4% 3% 4% D 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 41% 38% 31% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 9 ## Page 12 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on not engaging in ex parte communications? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 56% 61% 59% B 11% 10% 12% C 7% 4% 4% D 1% 1% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 27% 23% 21% Average Grade 3.7 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 10 ## Page 13 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on providing written communications that are clear, thorough, and well reasoned? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 37% 42% 37% B 16% 23% 23% C 11% 9% 9% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 3% 2% No Grade 35% 21% 27% Average Grade 3.4 3.3 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 11 ## Page 14 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on communicating verbally in a clear, thorough, and well reasoned manner? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 56% 55% 54% B 20% 27% 28% C 12% 9% 9% D 5% 3% 4% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 7% 3% 3% Average Grade 3.4 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 12 ## Page 15 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on explaining court procedures clearly and thoroughly? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 53% 54% 54% B 31% 25% 26% C 4% 9% 9% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 8% 8% 7% Average Grade 3.4 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 13 ## Page 16 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on maintaining a professional demeanor in the courtroom? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 60% 64% 64% B 19% 20% 21% C 8% 6% 7% D 4% 3% 4% Fail 4% 3% 3% No Grade 5% 3% 3% Average Grade 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 14 ## Page 17 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on listening patiently to all testimony and arguments before issuing a ruling? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 61% 57% 57% B 13% 22% 22% C 15% 8% 8% D 3% 4% 5% Fail 1% 4% 4% No Grade 7% 5% 4% Average Grade 3.4 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 15 ## Page 18 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on managing cases and docket efficiently and with minimal delay? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 35% 45% 46% B 23% 27% 27% C 19% 11% 11% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 4% 4% 4% No Grade 17% 9% 8% Average Grade 3.0 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 16 ## Page 19 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being punctual in commencing proceedings? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 51% 55% 54% B 29% 28% 28% C 9% 8% 9% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 3% 2% 2% No Grade 7% 4% 4% Average Grade 3.3 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 17 ## Page 20 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on using court time efficiently? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 47% 54% 54% B 24% 26% 25% C 12% 10% 10% D 8% 3% 3% Fail 4% 3% 3% No Grade 5% 5% 5% Average Grade 3.1 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 18 ## Page 21 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being prepared for all court matters? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 61% 59% 58% B 20% 22% 23% C 8% 7% 7% D 3% 2% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 7% 7% 7% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 19 ## Page 22 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 40% 49% 49% B 19% 18% 18% C 7% 7% 7% D 1% 2% 3% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 33% 21% 21% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 20 ## Page 23 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 5f. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on providing quick access to the court in emergency matters? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 29% 32% 33% B 7% 13% 13% C 5% 5% 5% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 56% 46% 45% Average Grade 3.4 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 21 ## Page 24 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 6a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on having knowledge of the rules of evidence and procedure? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 53% 57% 53% B 24% 24% 25% C 7% 8% 9% D 5% 2% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 9% 7% 7% Average Grade 3.4 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 22 ## Page 25 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 6b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on ruling on motions in a timely matter? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 49% 49% 49% B 23% 25% 25% C 11% 8% 8% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 1% 3% 3% No Grade 13% 11% 13% Average Grade 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 23 ## Page 26 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 6c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on making the correct decision based upon the law and the facts? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 47% 45% 44% B 27% 29% 29% C 9% 11% 12% D 7% 5% 5% Fail 3% 4% 4% No Grade 8% 6% 6% Average Grade 3.2 3.1 3.1 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 24 ## Page 27 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 6d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on making decisions without regard to possible criticism? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 57% 51% 50% B 19% 20% 20% C 5% 8% 8% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 16% 16% 15% Average Grade 3.6 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 25 ## Page 28 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Attorney Survey 7. Do you recommend that Judge Berryhill be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 Retain in office 80% 85% 84% Do not retain in office 15% 10% 11% No opinion 5% 5% 5% Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 26 ## Page 29 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being courteous toward everyone in the courtroom? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 77% 68% 67% B 15% 19% 19% C 2% 5% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 3% 4% 4% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 1 ## Page 30 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being courteous toward persons representing themselves? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 44% 47% B 10% 14% 15% C 3% 4% 5% D 1% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 41% 35% 30% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 2 ## Page 31 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of race? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 71% 68% 65% B 14% 14% 14% C 1% 3% 4% D 1% 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% 2% No Grade 12% 13% 14% Average Grade 3.8 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 3 ## Page 32 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of gender? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 73% 70% 67% B 12% 15% 16% C 1% 4% 5% D 1% 1% 2% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 10% 8% 9% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 4 ## Page 33 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of age? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 73% 70% 67% B 14% 15% 16% C 1% 4% 5% D 2% 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% 2% No Grade 9% 9% 10% Average Grade 3.7 3.7 3.6 Letter Grade A- A- B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 5 ## Page 34 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties equally regardless of social/economic status? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 75% 69% 66% B 12% 15% 15% C 1% 4% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 3% 2% 3% No Grade 9% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 6 ## Page 35 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being fair and impartial toward both sides? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 76% 68% 65% B 13% 15% 16% C 1% 5% 5% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 4% 4% 4% No Grade 3% 6% 7% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 7 ## Page 36 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on treating parties without attorneys fairly? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 33% 40% 43% B 11% 11% 12% C 2% 3% 4% D 1% 2% Fail 3% 2% 3% No Grade 50% 44% 37% Average Grade 3.4 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 8 ## Page 37 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on giving each side enough time to present his or her case? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 75% 66% 63% B 14% 16% 16% C 5% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% 3% No Grade 4% 9% 11% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 9 ## Page 38 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on speaking in a way that is clearly understood? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 78% 72% 70% B 18% 18% 19% C 3% 5% 6% D 1% 1% 2% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 1% 2% 2% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 10 ## Page 39 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on explaining court procedures clearly and thoroughly? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 76% 71% 69% B 16% 18% 18% C 3% 5% 6% D 1% 1% 2% Fail 1% 1% 2% No Grade 3% 4% 4% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 11 ## Page 40 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on maintaining a professional demeanor in the courtroom? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 81% 74% 72% B 12% 15% 16% C 4% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 1% 1% 2% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 12 ## Page 41 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on listening patiently to all testimony and arguments before issuing a ruling? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 79% 68% 66% B 12% 16% 17% C 5% 5% 5% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 2% 6% 6% Average Grade 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 13 ## Page 42 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on managing cases efficiently and with minimal delay? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 59% 57% 56% B 17% 21% 22% C 10% 8% 8% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 11% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 14 ## Page 43 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on starting court on time? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 62% 59% 57% B 21% 22% 23% C 7% 8% 9% D 1% 3% 3% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 6% 6% 6% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 15 ## Page 44 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on being prepared for cases? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 71% 66% 64% B 14% 17% 18% C 5% 5% 6% D 1% 1% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 7% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.6 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 16 ## Page 45 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 6a. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on considering all information presented when making a decision? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 67% 63% 62% B 13% 15% 16% C 5% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 4% 3% 4% No Grade 11% 11% 11% Average Grade 3.5 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 17 ## Page 46 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 6b. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on having knowledge of the rules of evidence, procedure and the law? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 71% 69% 67% B 13% 14% 16% C 3% 4% 5% D 2% 1% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 10% 10% 10% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 18 ## Page 47 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 6c. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on deciding important matters in a timely way? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 66% 64% 62% B 19% 17% 18% C 4% 5% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 7% 10% 10% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 19 ## Page 48 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 6d. How would you grade Judge Berryhill on making decisions without regard to public criticism? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 58% 57% 55% B 12% 13% 14% C 4% 4% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 3% No Grade 22% 22% 22% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 20 ## Page 49 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Non-Attorney Survey 7. Do you recommend that Judge Berryhill be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All District All Trial Berryhill Judges 2002 Judges 2002 Retain in office 92% 85% 83% Do not retain in office 5% 7% 8% No opinion 3% 8% 9% Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1 Page 21 ## Page 50 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy Sample: The Colorado Judicial Department provided Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc. with a list of cases heard and closed during the two years prior to the summer of 2001 by the 115 justices and judges standing for retention in November 2002. From this list of cases, Talmey-Drake Research drew a sample of the 250 cases most recently closed for each judge or justice. In some instances where there were an insufficient number of cases (or participants in cases), the time period during which cases could be drawn was lengthened. For each case selected a list of people associated with the case who had likely appeared in the judge’s courtroom were drawn from the Judicial Department’s database, ICON, and the Colorado District Attorney’s database (Blackstone system). The cases and the associated case participants were divided up among the 22 judicial districts and put on CD ROM. These CD’s were distributed to the judicial districts, and district personnel added the names of people who were associated with a case, but whose names and addresses had not been captured electronically. The data from the judicial districts were then returned to Talmey-Drake Research where the data was combined and cleaned. Included in the data cleaning was the identification of potential respondents in the sample who had appeared in more than two judges’ courtrooms. Due to concerns about respondent fatigue, no more than two questionnaires were intended to be sent to any one respondent—though there were a few instances where one respondent did receive more than two questionnaires. Where a person had been in more than two judges’ courtrooms, the selection criteria for which judges he or she would be sent questionnaires was: first, for the judge in whose courtroom the potential respondent had been in most often, and two, the judge with the smallest sample of the judges in whose courtroom the potential respondent had been in. Added to this database were a database of jurors and one of court employees. Survey: In November 2002, each person in the database was mailed a postcard saying they would receive a questionnaire concerning judicial performance and that it was important for them to fill it out and return it. Shortly thereafter, they were sent an initial questionnaire and an introductory letter with a postage- paid return envelope. Those who did not respond to the first questionnaire were then sent a sent a second questionnaire and letter. Non-respondents to the second survey were sent a reminder postcard. At this point, non- responders who had been sent questionnaires about judges who had not yet achieved a target cooperation rate of 40% were sent a third letter and questionnaire—and a follow up postcard. During this process, the sample was augmented for judges with a particularly low number of completed questionnaires. 1 ## Page 51 Questionnaire:The questionnaire used in the 2002 Judicial Performance Survey is identical to the questionnaire used for the 2000 survey. Respondents were asked to use a grade of A, B, C, D, or F (Fail) to assess the justice’s or judge’s performance in the areas of Courtesy, Impartiality, Communication, Judicial Temperament, Diligence and Application of the Law. These scores were then converted to a numerical value where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. Response: The response rate is calculated as the number of completed questionnaires divided by the number of eligible respondents who actually received a questionnaire. The following table shows the total number of questionnaires mailed, completed, non-responses & refusals, undeliverables and other responses. The table presents the overall response rate as well as the response rate by the different types of respondents. Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Attorney Respondents Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate District Attorney 852 511 227 42 72 69.2% Attorney For Defendant 3,277 1,921 809 223 324 70.4% Attorney for Plaintiff 1,711 1,001 428 92 190 70.0% Guardian ad Litem 85 47 22 9 7 68.1% Unknown Attorney Type 460 206 112 102 40 64.8% Attorney Total 6,385 3,686 1,598 468 633 69.8% Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Non-Attny Respondents Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate Law Enforcement 6,918 2,517 2,648 577 1,176 48.7% Social Services Casewrkr 117 61 36 15 5 62.9% Employee 1,946 1,142 526 105 173 68.5% Defendant 15,701 2,467 7,511 5,109 614 24.7% Plaintiff 3,276 943 1,538 553 242 38.0% Juror 12,910 6,565 4,443 776 1,126 59.6% Victim 3,158 414 1,601 788 355 20.5% Other 4,611 816 2,288 951 556 26.3% Non-attorney Total 48,637 14,925 20,591 8,874 4,247 42.0% Total 55,022 18,611 22,189 9,342 4,880 45.6% A similar table showing the response count and cooperation rate for your survey is provided at the end of this methodology section. 2 ## Page 52 Results: The results of the Survey are in two main sections: Results and Comments. Within each main section are two subsections, one for each general type of respondent, attorney or non-attorney. Results: This section shows the percentage distribution of grades you received on each of the substantive questions plus the retain/do not retain question. An average grade point for each graded question is computed and shown in the results section. A letter grade is also assigned to each grade point according to the following scale. A = 4.00 B = 3.00 to 3.33 C = 2.00 to 2.33 D = 1.00 to 1.33 A— = 3.68 to 3.99 B— = 2.67 to 2.99 C— = 1.67 to 1.99 D— = 0.67 to 0.99 B+ = 3.34 to 3.66 C+ = 2.34 to 2.66 D+ = 1.34 to 1.66 Fail = 0.00 to 0.67 This section also includes two comparative columns of results: one comparative column shows the results for that question for all county or district judges (as appropriate) surveyed in 2002, along with a second comparative column showing the results for all trial judges in the 2002 survey. Comments: Each respondent was encouraged to comment on the judge’s performance in the six areas of Courtesy, Impartiality, Communication, Judicial temperament, Diligence, Application of the law as well as the judge’s Overall performance. This section contains these comments—again divided between results from attorneys and non-attorneys. Sampling All sample surveys are subject to what is known as sampling error—the Error: extent to which the results of the sample survey may differ from what would be obtained if the entire population being surveyed had been interviewed. The size of the sampling error is almost entirely due to the number of people interviewed for the survey and the variance of responses. The table below shows the extent of sampling error (95%-confidence interval) for various sizes of random samples and sample percentage results. Sample Size 25 50 100 150 200 300 Percentages near 10% or 90% ± 11.8% ± 8.3% ± 5.9% ± 4.8% ± 4.2% ± 3.4% Percentages near 20% or 80% ± 15.7% ± 11.1% ± 7.8% ± 6.4% ± 5.5% ± 4.5% Percentages near 30% or 70% ± 18.0% ± 12.7% ± 9.0% ± 7.3% ± 6.4% ± 5.2% Percentages near 40% or 60% ± 19.2% ± 13.6% ± 9.6% ± 7.8% ± 6.8% ± 5.5% Percentages near 50% ± 19.6% ± 13.9% ± 9.8% ± 8.0% ± 6.9% ± 5.7% For example, suppose a reported percentage is 80% in a sample size of 150, then one could expect that 95% of the time that a random sample of the same size and collected the same way would include the true population percentage within the range of 80% plus or minus 6.4%. Averages such as grade points also have a 95% confidence interval, however it is not so easily displayed in a table as confidence intervals about a percentage. Suffice it to say that the confidence interval about a score generally increases with smaller sample size. 3 ## Page 53 Judge Jack W. Berryhill Survey Disposition Report Total Refusals & Undeliv- Other Response Sent Completes Nonresponse erables Response Rate District Attorney 19 11 6 2 64.7% Attorney For Defendant 80 48 19 2 11 71.6% Attorney for Plaintiff 37 16 18 3 47.1% Guardian ad Litem Unknown Attorney Type Sub Total: 136 75 43 2 16 63.6% Law Enforcement 1 1 100.0% Social Services Caseworker Employee 16 7 9 43.8% Defendant 145 21 61 60 3 25.6% Plaintiff 40 12 21 6 1 36.4% Juror 132 90 35 3 4 72.0% Victim 11 2 5 2 2 28.6% Other 68 14 32 16 6 30.4% Sub Total: 413 147 163 87 16 47.4% Total: 549 222 206 89 32 51.9% 1. 'Other Response' predominately includes people who sent back a survey saying they did not appear in the courtroom, and people who are deceased, or otherwise incapable of responding, and people who could not recall the experience. 2. The Response Rate is calculated using the following formula: Completes (Total Sent - Undeliverables - Other Responses) Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 1

Score cards render where the PDF extractor found numeric fields (partial is shown with “—” for missing tiles). “Read full survey text” surfaces the complete report transcription for every survey on file. Source PDFs on OJPE are always linked above for fidelity. Coverage note on Sources.

Sources

• 2008 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 2002 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026