Christine A. Carney

Evaluation history

• 2012 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Larimer · Larimer

  Commission vote: 10 for · 0 against

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  Retention Year: 2012 Recommendation: Retain Reports: 2012 Retention Survey Report (PDF) 2011 Interim Survey Report (PDF) 2009 Interim Survey Report (PDF) Need an accessible PDF Document Version? Please click on the link below and email our staff Contact Us The Eighth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends by a vote of 10-0 that Judge Christine A. Carney BE RETAINED. Judge Carney was appointed to the Larimer County Court in 1998, after having practiced law for approximately 17 years. Her cases consist of civil matters with a jurisdictional limit of $15,000 and criminal cases comprised of misdemeanor and traffic offenses. Judge Carney received her undergraduate degree from Michigan State University and her Juris Doctorate degree from the University of Colorado. She is currently the presiding County Court Judge for Larimer County. Since her previous judicial performance evaluation Judge Carney received the 2011 Conrad Ball Award for her contributions toward improving the quality of justice in Larimer County. In addition, for her outstanding service on the bench Judge Carney received the Colorado Judicial Institute’s Judicial Excellence Award on November 20, 2011. The Commission reviewed evaluation survey results, letters submitted by individuals, and the judge’s self-evaluation and written opinions; performed courtroom observations; interviewed representatives of the District Attorney and Public Defender Offices; and conducted an interview with Judge Carney. Judge Carney’s performance over the past term has been excellent and she is rated above the average in all areas for all county judges standing for retention. Attorneys surveyed comment on her fairness, knowledge of the law, efficiency, and preparation. Both attorneys and non-attorneys surveyed cite the fact that she treats those in her court with dignity and courtesy. Although the county court docket is laden with cases, there are numerous comments that speak to Judge Carney’s ability to move the proceedings without compromising the opportunity for individuals to be heard. Both the District Attorney and Public Defender often assign new attorneys to her courtroom because of her willingness to mentor and provide a supportive learning environment. Judge Carney indicates this is an assignment she takes pride in having. There were very few weaknesses identified. One, which Judge Carney acknowledged and is addressing, involves a slight tendency toward impatience; but even those who identified this weakness considered it to be minimal. Overall comments on the surveys reflect an excellent judge who is a credit to the bench and definitely worthy of retention. Of all attorneys surveyed about retention, 96% recommended to retain, 2% not to retain, and 2% were undecided or didn’t have enough information to make a recommendation. Of those expressing an opinion to retain or not to retain, 98% recommended to retain and 2% not to retain. Of all non-attorneys surveyed, 86% recommended to retain, 4% not to retain, and 10% were undecided or didn’t have enough information to make a recommendation. Of those expressing an opinion to retain or not to retain, 95% recommended to retain and 5% not to retain.
• 2008 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Larimer · Larimer

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  VotersRetained· 76.9% yes

  93,063 yes · 27,981 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 Eighth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance strongly recommends by unanimous vote that Judge Christine A. Carney BE RETAINED. Judge Carney was appointed to the Larimer County Court in 1998. Her cases are approximately one-half civil cases and one-half criminal cases consisting of misdemeanor and traffic offenses. Prior to her appointment to the bench, Judge Carney practiced law for 17 years. Judge Carney is currently the presiding County Court judge for Larimer County, having administrative responsibilities for the county courts, and is acting as a mentor judge of a newly appointed judge in Weld County. Her administrative duties as presiding judge include participation in cooperative efforts to provide access to justice and to improve the operations of the criminal justice system with respect to county court cases. Judge Carney engages in community service including participation in the High School Mock Trial Program. The Commission interviewed Judge Carney, observed her in the courtroom, reviewed opinions authored by her, interviewed persons with significant contacts with Judge Carney, and considered the results of a survey of persons who have appeared before her as parties, attorneys, and jurors. The survey rated Judge Carney in the areas of case management, knowledge and application of the law, communications, demeanor and diligence. Attorneys responding to the survey rated Judge Carney significantly above the average for county court and trial judges in all five categories. Ninety-eight percent (98%) of attorneys and ninety-four percent (94%) of non-attorneys favored retention of Judge Carney. Ninety-five percent (95%) of attorneys responding and eighty-five percent (85%) of non-attorneys responding strongly recommended that Judge Carney be retained in office.
• 2004 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Larimer · Larimer

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  VotersRetained· 79.6% yes

  84,282 yes · 21,641 no50% needed to retain
  Retention Year: 2004 Recommendation: Retain Reports: 2004 Retention Survey Report Need an accessible PDF Document version? Please click on the link below and email our staff Contact Us The Eighth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously recommends that Judge Christine A. Carney BE RETAINED. The vote of the Commission was 10-0. Judge Carney received her undergraduate degree from Michigan State University and her Juris Doctorate from the University of Colorado School of Law in 1980. Judge Carney was a Deputy District Attorney in Pueblo prior to establishing her law practice in Fort Collins in 1986. Her primary practice was with criminal defense and general civil cases. Judge Carney was appointed a County Judge for Larimer County on July 1, 1998. During the period of this review, Judge Carney handled both criminal and civil cases. The Commission reviewed the 2004 Judicial Performance Survey data from attorneys and non-attorneys prepared by the Colorado State Commission on Judicial Performance. The survey evaluated case management, application and knowledge of the law, communications, demeanor, and diligence. The Commission reviewed a written self-evaluation and interviewed Judge Carney. The Commission also interviewed attorneys and non-attorneys having professional contact with the judge, conducted a public hearing, and made courtroom observations. All interviews were consistently positive. She is held in high esteem by all who were interviewed as well as receiving high marks from her survey results. Judge Carney's survey average, overall and by category, from attorneys and non-attorneys were above all county judges and trial judges. Her special attributes are reported as being fair, polite, respectful, patient, and knowledgeable. She is flexible and accommodating and has received high marks from law enforcement respondents. She can portray humor and compassion and has great patience with individuals that represent themselves. The Young Lawyers named Judge Carney the outstanding Jurist in Larimer County. The Eighth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance believes Judge Carney to be an asset to the Larimer County judiciary and recommends her retention.
• 2000 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Larimer · Larimer

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  Retention Year: 2000 Recommendation: Retain The Eighth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously recommends that Judge Christine A. Carney BE RETAINED. Judge Carney was appointed as a Larimer County Court Judge on July 1, 1998. Before her appointment Judge Carney practiced as an attorney primarily in the field of criminal law. She is a graduate of Michigan State University and CU Law School (1980). The Judicial Performance Commission personally interviewed each judge in the District whose term was nearing completion and who was seeking retention. Further, written evaluations were requested from a random sample of attorneys, court employees, law enforcement personnel, jurors, litigants, crime victims and other constituents who have been involved in proceedings in each judge's court. Survey results were designed and compiled by an independent agency to provide confidentiality. Results from crime victims were deemed unreliable due to insufficient responses. Eighty-eight (88) non-attorneys and 33 attorneys responded to a survey on the performance of Judge Carney in the six areas of courtesy, impartiality, communication skills, judicial temperament, diligence, and application of law. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of non-attorneys and 91% of attorneys recommended that Judge Carney be retained in office. Sixteen percent (16%) of non-attorneys and 3% of attorneys recommended that Judge Carney not be retained in office. Six percent (6%) of non-attorneys and 6% of attorneys had no opinion with respect to retention. Judge Carney received her highest ratings in the categories of judicial temperament, impartiality and communication skills. Judge Carney has taken solid management steps to building a team relationship with her staff. She is flexible and accommodating to the demands of the office. She has prepared a plain-English handout for pro se (self-represented) defendants which explains courtroom procedures. Her caseload is managed in a timely fashion. She uses humor and has an open attitude in the courtroom, creating an atmosphere in which litigants can feel they are fairly heard and can understand her rulings. The Eighth Judicial Performance Review Commission believes Judge Carney to be professional and competent and considers her an asset to the Larimer County bench.

Surveys & reports

• 2012 cycle
  • 2011 Interim Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
    Read full interim survey textexpandcollapse

    ## Page 1 State of Colorado Logo COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE TThhee HHoonnoorraabbllee CChhrriissttiinnee AA.. CCaarrnneeyy 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 8th Judicial District ## Page 2 May 6, 2011 The Honorable Christine A. Carney Larimer County Justice Center 201 La Porte Ave., Suite 100 Ft. Collins, CO 80521 Dear Judge Carney: I am pleased to make available to you the attached copy of your 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey Report. The report is based on two surveys relating to how you are seen carrying out the performance of your office: One of attorneys who have had cases in your court or who are knowledgeable about your judicial performance, second a survey of non-attorneys who have observed your performance in court or who have otherwise been affected by your performance as a judge. In addition to this introduction, the report is divided into five main sections: 1. A brief summary of the results of the two surveys. 2. The numerical results of the survey of attorneys in both tabular and graphical form. In addition to the numerical results, this section also contains comments attorneys made about your judicial performance. In some instances the comments have been redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. A copy of the attorney questionnaire is included in the final section of this report. 3. The numerical results of the survey of non-attorneys in both tabular and graphical form. In addition to the numerical results, this section also contains comments these respondent made on the subject of your judicial performance. In few instances the comments have been redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. A copy of the non-attorney questionnaire is included in the final section of this report. 4. The fourth section of the Report discusses the methodology of the surveys. 5. The final section provides copies of the questions or questionnaires that were used for each survey. 100 Arap ahoe, Suite One, Boulder, CO 80302 Phone 303.443.5300 Fax 303.200.7385 ## Page 3 Hon. Christine A. Carney May 6, 2011 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 ext 1 or by email at talmey@talmeyresearch.com (please put the words “Judicial Performance” in the subject line), and for any other questions you might have about the survey please call the Executive Director of the Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation, Jane Howell, at 303-866-6465. Best regards, Paul A. Talmey President enc: ## Page 4 SSuummmmaarryy ooff RReessuullttss bbyy YYeeaarr aanndd JJuurroorr//NNoonn--JJuurroorr On average, county judges received an overall combined average grade in the 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey of 3.45--the overall average grade received from attorney respondents, 3.33, to the survey plus the overall average grade received from non-attorney respondents, 3.56, divided by two. Based on an average attorney grade of 3.81, and an average non-attorney grade of 3.63, Judge Christine A. Carney’s combined grade for the 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey of 3.72. Judge Carney Average Grade Combined Attorney Non-attorney Overall Grade 3.72 3.81 3.63 Sample Size - 175 236 Table 1 The results presented in this report are based on data from cases heard and closed by Judge Carney from 2007 through 2010. (See Methodology section for description of sampling process.) Table 2 shows Judge Carney’s overall average grades for each of these years. Judge Carney Average Grades by Year Combined Attorney Non-Attorney Average Average Sample Average Sample Year Score Score Size Score Size 2007 3.67 3.82 38 3.51 78 2008 3.73 3.87 18 3.58 33 2009 3.74 3.77 54 3.70 75 2010 3.78 3.82 65 3.73 50 Overall 3.72 3.81 175 3.63 236 Table 2 Due to sending questionnaires to all jurors—not just a sample—and their much higher response rate than other non-attorneys surveyed, the percentage of jurors in the county judge sample of the non-attorney survey is 54%. Moreover, jurors tend to grade judges much higher than non-jurors. The juror overall average grade for county judges was 3.83, while the overall average grade awarded by non-jurors was 3.26. The effect of this is that judges with a higher percentage of jurors in their sample tend to have higher average grades in the non-attorney survey than those judges with a small percentage of 1 ## Page 5 jurors. The number of jurors in a judge’s sample is, of course, closely related to the number of jury trials the judge presides over. The table below shows Judge Carney’s non-attorney results broken out by jurors and non-jurors for each year from 2007 to 2010. It also shows the overall average juror and non-juror grades for all county judges. Judge Carney Average Grades by Year Jurors Non-Jurors All County Judges Average Sample Average Sample Juror Non-Juror Year Score Size % Score Size % Average Average 2007 3.83 14 18% 3.44 64 82% 3.82 3.30 2008 3.80 12 36% 3.45 21 64% 3.82 3.26 2009 3.90 54 72% 3.18 21 28% 3.83 3.22 2010 3.90 36 72% 3.33 14 28% 3.85 3.25 All Yrs. 3.88 116 49% 3.39 120 51% 3.83 3.26 Table 3 Table 3 allows one to compare Judge Carney’s juror and non-juror grades with the all county judge averages to better ascertain if the judge is seen as performing relatively well or relatively poorly among these two subgroups. 2 ## Page 6 SSuurrvveeyy ooff AAtoorrnneeyyss RReeggaarrddiinngg JJuuddggee CChhrriissttiinnee AA.. CCaarrnneeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 117755)) ## Page 7 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Sample Size = 175 A B C D Fail DK/NA Carney Judges 1. Case Management: 1a. Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. 75% 12% 1% 0% 0% 13% 3.85 3.52 1b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 87% 11% 1% 0% 1% 1% 3.85 3.44 1c. Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. 74% 12% 2% 0% 1% 11% 3.80 3.39 1d. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 86% 10% 2% 0% 0% 3% 3.86 3.39 Overall Case Management 3.84 3.44 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: 2a. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 80% 14% 3% 1% 1% 2% 3.75 3.29 2b. Basing decisions on evidence and arguments. 73% 14% 3% 0% 1% 9% 3.75 3.16 2c. Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. 71% 17% 1% 1% 1% 10% 3.74 3.07 2d. Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are 73% 10% 1% 1% 1% 15% 3.80 3.27 similar. Overall Application and Knowledge of Law 3.76 3.20 3. Communications: 3a. Making sure all participants understand the proceedings. 83% 14% 0% 0% 1% 2% 3.83 3.53 3b. Providing written communications that are clear, thorough 74% 18% 1% 0% 1% 7% 3.76 3.30 and well reasoned. Overall Communications 3.80 3.42 4. Demeanor: 4a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 85% 13% 1% 0% 1% 1% 3.83 3.43 4b. Treating parties with respect. 88% 10% 0% 1% 1% 1% 3.84 3.43 4c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. 86% 12% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3.82 3.26 4d. Consistently applying laws and rules. 83% 10% 1% 1% 1% 3% 3.81 3.27 Overall Demeanor 3.83 3.35 5. Diligence: 5a. Using good judgment in application of relevant law and 80% 14% 1% 2% 1% 2% 3.75 3.20 rules. 5b. Doing the necessary homework and being prepared for 80% 14% 2% 0% 1% 3% 3.79 3.28 his/her cases. 5c. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when 75% 8% 1% 0% 0% 17% 3.90 3.39 they are complicated and time consuming. Overall Diligence 3.81 3.29 Overall Average Grade: 3.81 3.33 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 4 ## Page 8 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Percentage Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Carney Judges Sample Size = 175 Would you say the judge is: Very biased in favor of the prosecution 1% 9% Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution 8% 28% Completely neutral 88% 50% Somewhat biased in favor of the defense 2% 6% Very biased in favor of the defense 0% 2% Don't know or not sure 1% 5% 8. How strongly do you recommend that the Judge be retained in office, or not be retained in office? [Percentages excluding undecided responses.] Strongly recommend retain 95% 71% Somewhat recommend retain 4% 17% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 6% Strongly recommend not retain 1% 7% Total Retain 99% 88% Total Not Retain 2% 13% [Percentages including undecided responses.] Strongly recommend retain 93% 68% Somewhat recommend retain 4% 16% Undecided or Don't Know 2% 5% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 6% Strongly recommend not retain 1% 6% Total Retain 97% 84% Undecided/Don't Know 2% 5% Total Not Retain 2% 12% 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 5 ## Page 9 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.81 Overall Average Grade 3.33 Q1. Overall Case Management 3.84 3.44 1a. Promptly issuing a decision on the 3.85 case after trial. 3.52 1b. Maintainingappropriate control over 3.85 proceedings. 3.44 3.80 1c. Promptlyruling on pre-trial motions. 3.39 1d.Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 3.86 3.39 3.76 Q2. OverallApp & Knowledge of Law 3.20 2a. Beingable to identify and analyze 3.75 relevant facts. 3.29 2b.Basing decisions on evidence and argument. 3.75 3.16 3.74 2c. Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. 3.07 2d. [Criminal only] Issuing consistant sentences 3.80 whencircumstances are simmilar. 3.27 3.80 Q3. Overall Communication 3.42 3a.Making sure all participants understand 3.83 the proceedings. 3.53 3b. Providing written communications that are 3.76 clear, thorough and well reasoned. 3.30 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney All County Judges Judge Christine A. Carney 6 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 10 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.83 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.35 3.83 4a. Giving proceedingsa sense of dignity. 3.43 3.84 4b. Treating participants with respect. 3.43 4c. Conducting [his/her] courtroom 3.82 in a neutral manner. 3.26 3.81 4d. Consistanly applyinglaws and rules. 3.27 3.81 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.29 5a. Using good judgement in application of 3.75 releveant laws and rules. 3.20 5b. Doing the necessary 'homework' and 3.79 being prepared for [his/her] cases. 3.28 5c. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even 3.90 when they are complicated and time consuming. 3.39 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Biased in favor of prosecution/defense. 1% Very biased in favor of the prosecution 9% 8% Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution 28% 88% Completely Neutral 50% 2% Somewhat biased in favor of the defense 6% 0% Very biased in favor of the defense 2% 1% Don't know/not sure 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Christine A. Carney All County Judges 7 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 11 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Q8. How strongly do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained or not retained in office? Excluding Undecided Respondents 95% Strongly recommend retain 71% 4% Somewhat recommend retain 17% All Cnty Judge Carney Judges 1% Total Retain 99% 88% Somewhat recommend not retain Total Not Retain 2% 13% 6% 1% Strongly recommend not retain 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Including Undecided Respondents 93% Strongly recommend retain 68% 4% Somewhat recommend retain 16% All Cnty 2% Judge Carney Judges Undecided or DK 5% Total Retain 97% 84% Undecided or DK 2% 5% 1% Somewhat recommend not retain Total Not Retain 2% 12% 6% 1% Strongly recommend not retain 6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Christine A. Carney All County Judges 8 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 12 SSuurrvveeyy ooff NNoonn--AAtoorrnneeyyss RReeggaarrddiinngg JJuuddggee CChhrriissttiinnee AA.. CCaarrnneeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 223366)) ## Page 13 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Sample Size = 236 A B C D Fail DK/NA Carney Judges 1. Demeanor: 1a. Giving court proceedings a sense of dignity. 77% 16% 4% 1% 1% 1% 3.68 3.59 1b. Treating participants in the case politely and with respect. 80% 13% 4% 0% 1% 1% 3.72 3.61 1c. Conducting court in a neutral manner. 76% 16% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3.65 3.55 1d. Having a sense of compassion and human understanding 67% 20% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3.49 3.47 for those who appear before the court. Overall Demeanor 3.64 3.56 2. Fairness: 2a. Giving participants an opportunity to be heard. 75% 17% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3.65 3.59 2b. Treating those involved in the case without bias. 74% 15% 4% 2% 3% 3% 3.59 3.52 2c. Treating fairly people who represent themselves. 53% 10% 1% 0% 3% 33% 3.65 3.51 2d. Giving each side enough time to present his or her case. 75% 15% 1% 1% 3% 5% 3.66 3.59 Overall Fairness 3.64 3.55 3. Communications: 3a. Making sure participants understand the proceedings, and 76% 17% 3% 1% 2% 1% 3.66 3.64 what is going on in the courtroom. 3b. Using language that everyone can understand. 74% 19% 4% 1% 1% 1% 3.66 3.66 3c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear 79% 16% 2% 1% 1% 1% 3.74 3.69 what is being said. Overall Communications 3.69 3.66 4. Diligence: 4a. Beginning court on time 69% 20% 5% 2% 2% 3% 3.55 3.45 4b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 80% 13% 3% 0% 3% 2% 3.71 3.67 4c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 60% 18% 1% 3% 2% 17% 3.56 3.56 4d. Being prepared for cases. 70% 15% 3% 2% 2% 9% 3.65 3.61 4e. Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted 71% 20% 4% 1% 2% 2% 3.59 3.50 time. Overall Diligence 3.61 3.56 5. Application of Law: 5a. Giving reasons for rulings. 63% 20% 4% 1% 4% 7% 3.47 3.50 5b. Willing to make decisions without regard to possible 64% 14% 0% 1% 3% 18% 3.63 3.52 outside pressure. 5c. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 71% 14% 2% 2% 4% 6% 3.57 3.50 Overall Application of Law 3.56 3.51 Overall Average Grade: 3.63 3.56 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 10 ## Page 14 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Percentage Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Carney Judges Sample Size = 236 6. How biased do you think the Judge is toward the defense or prosecution? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Biased in favor of the prosecution total 10% 12% Competely neutral 81% 81% Biased in favor of the defense total 9% 7% [A positive average indicates bias toward prosecution, and a Average 0.13 0.12 negative average indicates a bias toward the defense.] 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences generally handed down by Judge are? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Harsh sentencing total 13% 12% Competely neutral 77% 77% Lenient sentencing total 12% 11% [A positive average indicates sentences are harsh, and a Average 0.05 0.06 negative average indicates sentences are lenient.] 10. How strongly do you recommend that the Judge be retained or not retained in office? [Percentages excluding undecided responses.] Strongly recommend retain 84% 84% Somewhat recommend retain 12% 8% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 2% Strongly recommend not retain 3% 6% Total Retain 96% 92% Total Not Retain 4% 8% [Percentages including undecided responses.] Strongly recommend retain 77% 77% Somewhat recommend retain 11% 8% Undecided or Don't Know 9% 8% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 2% Strongly recommend not retain 3% 5% Total Retain 88% 85% Undecided/Don't Know 9% 8% Total Not Retain 4% 7% 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 11 ## Page 15 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.63 Overall Average Grade 3.56 3.64 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.56 3.68 1a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 3.59 1b. Treating participants politely and with respect. 3.72 3.61 1c. Conducting the courtroom in a neutral 3.65 manner. 3.55 1d. Having a sense of compassion and human 3.49 understanding for those who appear before the judge. 3.47 3.64 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.55 2a. Giving participants an opportunity to be 3.65 heard. 3.59 2b. Treating those involved in the 3.59 case without bias. 3.52 2c. Treats people fairly who represent 3.65 themselves. 3.51 2d. Giving each side enough time to present his 3.66 or her case. 3.59 3.69 Q3. Overall Communtications 3.66 3a. Making sure participants understand the 3.66 proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom. 3.64 3b. Using language that everyone can 3.66 understand. 3.66 3c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom 3.74 can hear what's being said. 3.69 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney All County Judges Judge Christine A. Carney 12 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 16 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.61 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.56 3.55 4a. Beginning court on time. 3.45 4b. Maintaining appropriate control over 3.71 proceedings. 3.67 4c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 3.56 3.56 4d. Being prepared for his or her cases. 3.65 3.61 4e. Managing court proceedings so that there is 3.59 little wasted time. 3.50 3.56 Q5. Overall Legal Ability 3.51 5a. Giving reasons for rulings. 3.47 3.50 5b. Willing to make decision without regard to 3.63 possible outside pressure. 3.52 5c. Being able to identify and analyze 3.57 relevant facts. 3.50 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Q6 Biased in favor of prosecution/defense. 0.13 Christine A. Carney 0.12 All County Judges -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5   Defense Prosecution Q7 Lenience or Harshness in Sentencing. 0.05 Christine A. Carney 0.06 All County Judges -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5   Lenient Harsh Christine A. Carney All County Judges 13 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 17 Christine A. Carney All County Judges Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Q10. How strongly do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained or not retained in office? Excluding Undecided Respondents 84% Strongly recommend retain in office 84% 12% Somewhat recommend retain in office 8% All Cnty Judge Carney Judges Total Retain 96% 92% 1% Somewhat recommend not retain in office Total Not Retain 4% 8% 2% 3% Strongly recommend not retain in office 6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Including Undecided Respondents 77% Strongly recommend retain in office 77% 11% Somewhat recommend retain in office 8% 9% All Cnty Undecided 8% Judge Carney Judges Total Retain 88% 85% 1% Undecided 9% 8% Somewhat recommend not retain in office 2% Total Not Retain 4% 7% 3% Strongly recommend not retain in office 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Christine A. Carney All County Judges 14 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 18 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy ## Page 19 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy The results shown in the 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey Report are based on two surveys: The Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges, and the Survey of Non- Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges. Below is a description of the methodology used in the two surveys. I Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges a. Sample: Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy received case data with the names of people who had likely been in each judge’s courtroom from five primary sources: Colorado Judicial Department Colorado District Attorneys’ Council Denver County Courts District Attorney’s Office, Second Judicial District (Denver) District Attorney’s Office, Ninth Judicial District Additional information was provided by the State Public Defender’s Office and the courts in the 1st and 18th Judicial Districts. The data from these different data sources are combined, duplicates removed and addresses corrected. i. Prior to 2009, the survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges was conducted using paper questionnaires mailed to the attorneys’ offices. A sample of attorneys drawn from the case data were assigned to evaluate judges subject to the following rules applied in the order shown. 1. No attorney would be asked to evaluate the same judge in a 24-month period. 2. If an attorney was eligible to evaluate both a trial judge and an appellate judge, the attorney was assigned to evaluate the appellate judge. 3. If there were several judges the attorney could potentially evaluate, the attorney was assigned the judge with whom he or she had had the most cases during the sampling time frame, or the judge with the smallest sample in order to even out sample sizes among judges. Attorneys were mailed a questionnaire, and if they did not respond they were sent a reminder postcard followed by a second questionnaire and in some cases a second reminder postcard. Questionnaires were barcoded, and if an attorney mailed back two questionnaires, the second one was deleted from the data file. Attorneys who did not complete the survey after the second request were then telephoned and asked to complete the survey by phone. 16 ## Page 20 ii. In 2009 the Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Survey moved from being a paper survey mailed to potential respondents to an online survey. Moving the survey to online permitted asking individual attorneys to evaluate up to five trial judges, and with the exception of the effects of the modified assignment rules 1 through 3 below, it became a survey of all attorneys who had cases before trial judges. Allowing an attorney to evaluate up to five judges, entailed slightly modifying the assignment rules: 1. No attorney would be asked to evaluate the same justice or judge in a 24-month period. 2. If an attorney was eligible to evaluate both a trial judge and an appellate judge, the attorney was assigned to evaluate the appellate judge. 3. If there were more than five judges who could be assigned to the attorney, the attorney was assigned the judges with whom he or she had had the most cases during the sampling time frame, or the judges with the smallest samples in order to even out sample sizes among judges. Attorneys were first mailed a letter about the online survey to let them know that they would soon receive an email with a link to the survey. The Web address of the survey and a password were included in the letter if the attorney wanted to complete the survey immediately. A week after the first email was sent, a follow-up email was sent. Potential respondents who did not complete the survey after the second email were then telephoned and asked to either complete the survey then by phone, or to please complete it online. iii. In 2010, and going forward, rule #2 above was changed so that an attorney could be asked to evaluate a combination of up to seven trial judges or Court of Appeals judges, if the attorney had had a case before the COA. Attorneys who had cases before the both the Supreme Court and trial judges during the sample time frame were asked to evaluate all seven Supreme Court justices, and not asked to evaluate the trial judges. The results shown in the 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey Report for the Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges survey are based on the combined survey results collected from January 2005 through March 30, 20111 for those questions that have been consistently asked during that time period. Since 2010, the Judicial Performance Survey reports have been based on a moving average, or rolling sample, of survey results collected over a period of time equal to the justice’s or judge’s term of office: ten years for a Supreme Court justice, eight years for a COA judge, six years for a district judge and four years for a county judge. To use a district judge as an example: as survey data is collected it is pooled together for six years. After six years, as new data is added to the judge’s survey results in the first quarter of the seventh year, the oldest quarter of data in the pool is deleted. The current data for all judges only goes back as far as 2005—or the year the judge took the bench—therefore the rolling of the survey results only affects the county judge sample in the 2011 Interim reports. 1 The State Commission on Judicial Performance authorized continuous surveying in 2007. Prior to 2007 data was only collected in the odd numbered years before the retention reports were issued. Therefore, while data was gathered in 2005 and 2007 through the 1st quarter of 2011, and used in this report, there was no data collected in 2006. 17 ## Page 21 b. Questions: The survey questions asked respondents to use a grade of A, B, C, D, or F to assess the justice or judge's performance on twelve aspects of judicial performance. (See Questionnaire section.) These grades were then converted to a numerical scores where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. The A through F scale was chosen because it is almost universally recognized and understood. This makes it easy for respondents to complete their questionnaire, and for the public to interpret the results. Respondents were also asked if they considered the judge biased toward the defense or prosecution in criminal cases. In a final question, respondents were asked to indicate how strongly they would recommend that the justice or judge be retained or not retained in office. c. Comments: In addition to the A through F questions, respondents were also asked what they considered to be the judge’s strengths and what they considered to be the judge’s weaknesses. By statute these comments are confidential and only provided to the judge and the District Commission on Judicial Performance. They are not released to the public when the rest of the report is released. Before being given to the judge and the Commission, an attempt is made to redact all respondent identifying information from the comments. Since 2005 there have been changes to the number of comment questions asked, though the strengths and weaknesses questions have been posed in every survey. The number to the left of each comment refers to the same attorney respondent in both the strengths section and the weaknesses section. Most spelling and typographical errors have been fixed, but where the respondent entered a comment in all upper or all lower case, or without punctuation, the comment was not corrected. d. Analysis: The Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section first shows a table of the percentage distribution for each of the A through F questions, including “don’t know” responses. The next column to the right shows the judge’s average grade for each question. For comparison purposes, averages were also computed for all district judges and are shown in the furthest right column on the page. Tables showing the percentage distribution for all questions for all district judges are located at the end of this methodology section. The overall question averages are calculated by adding up the averages for each question and dividing by the number of questions. 18 ## Page 22 The next table shows the percentage distribution of the responses to the question about recommending retention. The first column of percentages is for the report-judge and the second column displays the percentages for all district judges. The percentages are shown both including and excluding “don’t know/undecided” responses. The next page displays the question averages in horizontal bar-graph form. The percentage distribution to the retention question is then presented in the graph on the next page. The third part of the Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section of the report lists the comments the attorney made about the judge’s strengths and weaknesses. e. Cooperation Rate: The overall response rate for the Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Survey is calculated as the number of completed survey-evaluations (the number of judges an attorney chose to evaluate) divided by the number of possible evaluations (the number of judges the attorney could have evaluated) resulting in an overall response rate of 43.3% for district judges and 33.4% for county judges. An equivalent response rate for an individual judge is computed as the number of completed survey-evaluations for that judge divided by the number of possible evaluations that could have been completed for the judge. Since 2009 attorneys have generally been asked to evaluate multiple judges per survey cycle, which affects the way cooperation rates are calculated and results in what appear to be lower overall cooperation rates. However, comparing the percentage of unique attorneys who responded to the mail surveys conducted from 2005 to 2008 to the percentage of unique attorneys who responded to the online surveys conducted from 2009 to the first quarter of 2011 yields very similar percentages. From 2005 to 2008 6,347 unique attorneys were asked to participate in the Judicial Performance mail surveys. Four thousand three (3,984), or 62.8%, responded with a completed questionnaire. Similarly, from 2009 through the first quarter 2011 Talmey-Drake asked 7,589 unique attorneys to participate in the Judicial Performance online survey, of which an almost identical percentage, 62.9% (4,777 attorneys) responded with one or more completed survey-evaluations of a judge. On average each attorney responding to the online survey request evaluated 3.7 judges. 2 2 Because Talmey-Drake deletes survey results associated with judges who are no longer on the bench, the counts used in this paragraph refer only to data collected regarding trial judges who are active at this writing. 19 ## Page 23 II Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges a. Sample: Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy received case data with the names of non-attorneys who had likely been in each judge’s courtroom from five primary sources: Colorado Judicial Department Colorado District Attorneys’ Council Denver County Courts District Attorney’s Office, Second Judicial District (Denver) District Attorney’s Office, Ninth Judicial District The data from these different data sources are combined, duplicates removed and addresses corrected. Depending on the number of names available to be sampled for each judge, a random sample was drawn if the quantity of potential respondents was large. On the other hand, if the count of possible respondents was small, all potential respondents were included in the sample. Where a person had been in more than one judge’s courtroom, the selection criteria for which judge he or she would be sent a questionnaire was generally for the judge in whose courtroom the potential respondent had been in most often. Each person whose name was sampled for the Non-Attorney Survey 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 was sent a personalized introductory letter and a questionnaire with a postage-paid return envelope. If the person did not respond, a second questionnaire and letter were sent approximately four weeks later. Questionnaires are barcoded, and if a respondent mailed back two questionnaires, the second one was deleted from the data file. Since in 2010, non-attorney section of the Judicial Performance Survey reports have been based on a moving average, or rolling sample, of survey results collected over a period of time equal to the judge’s term of office: six years for a district judge and four years for a county judge. To use a district judge as an example: as survey data is collected it is pooled together for six years. After six years, as new data is added to the judge’s survey results in the first quarter of the seventh year, the oldest quarter of data in the pool is deleted. The current data for all judges only goes back as far as 2005—or the year the judge took the bench—therefore the rolling of the survey results only affects the county judge sample in the 2011 Interim reports. 3 3 The State Commission on Judicial Performance authorized continuous surveying in 2007. Prior to 2007 data was only collected in the odd numbered years before the retention reports were issued. Therefore, while data was gathered in 2005 and 2007 through the 1st quarter of 2011, and used in this report, there was no data collected in 2006. 20 ## Page 24 b. Questions: The survey questions asked respondents to use a grade of A, B, C, D, or F to assess the justice or judge's performance on twelve aspects of judicial performance (See Questionnaire section.) These grades were then converted to a numerical scores where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. The A through F scale was chosen because it is almost universally recognized and understood. This makes it easy for respondents to complete their questionnaire, and for the public to interpret the results. Respondents were also asked if they considered the judge biased toward the defense or prosecution in criminal cases. In a final question, respondents were asked to indicate how strongly they would recommend that the justice or judge be retained or not retained in office. A copy of the questionnaire is included in the last section of this report. c. Analysis: The Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section first shows a table of the percentage distribution for each of the A through F questions, including “don’t know” responses. The next column to the right shows the judge’s average grade for each question. For comparison purposes, averages were also computed for all district judges and are shown in the furthest right column on the page. Tables showing the percentage distribution for all questions for all district judges are located at the end of this methodology section. The overall question averages are calculated by adding up the averages for each question and dividing by the number of questions. The next table shows the percentage distribution of the responses to the questions about prosecution or defense bias and recommending retention. The first column of percentages is for the report-judge and the second column displays the percentages for all district judges. The percentages for the retention question are shown including and excluding “don’t know/undecided” responses. The next page displays the question averages in horizontal bar-graph form. The percentage distribution of the prosecution-defense bias and retention questions are then presented in the graph on the next page. The third part of the Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section of the report lists the comments the attorney made about the judge’s strengths and weaknesses. d. Comments: In addition to the A through F questions, non-attorney respondents were asked what they considered to be the judge’s strengths and what they considered to be the judge’s weaknesses. By statute these comments are confidential and only provided to the judge and the District Commission on Judicial Performance. They are not released to the public when the rest of the report is released. Before being given to the judge and the 21 ## Page 25 Commission, an attempt is made to redact all respondent identifying information from the comments. Since 2005 there have been changes to the number of comment questions asked, though the strengths and weaknesses questions have been posed in every survey. The number to the left of each comment refers to the same attorney respondent in both the strengths section and the weaknesses section. e. Cooperation Rate: The estimated cooperation rate for the Non-attorney Survey 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 and refusals, undeliverables and other responses. The table presents the estimated overall cooperation rate as well as the cooperation rate by the different types of respondents. The true cooperation rates are likely higher than shown because of the percentage of people who were mailed questionnaires about judges who they had not observed. 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 table of the response counts by respondent type for Judge Carney is shown below, and on the next page is a table of the overall cooperation rates for both the attorney and non-attorney regarding trial judges surveys for all district judges. 22 ## Page 26 Judge Christine A. Carney Judge Response Counts by Type of Respondent Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Coop Role Type Sent Response Not Applicable Responses Completes Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 50 30 1 0 19 38.8% Defense Attorneys 225 119 3 0 103 46.4% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 50 24 4 0 22 47.8% Other Attorneys Civil 80 49 0 0 31 38.8% Total Attorneys 405 222 8 0 175 44.1% Non-attorneys Criminal Witness 102 73 21 3 5 6.2% Other 42 24 10 0 8 25.0% Law Enforcement 190 100 41 5 44 29.5% Defendant 608 329 235 3 41 11.0% Civil Litigant 145 94 31 3 17 14.9% Witness 8 6 1 0 1 14.3% Other 2 1 0 0 1 50.0% Jurors 234 100 12 6 116 52.3% Employees 6 3 0 0 3 50.0% Total Non-attorneys 1337 730 351 20 236 23.9% Grand Total: 1742 952 359 20 411 29.7% 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 23 ## Page 27 Total Response Counts by Type of Respondent for All County Judges Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Completes Cooperation Sent Response Not Applicable Responses Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 4156 2811 74 4 1267 31.0% Defense Attorneys 17291 11594 196 12 5489 32.1% Other Attorneys Criminal 160 82 25 0 53 39.3% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 2387 1332 95 5 955 41.7% Other Attorneys Civil 2728 1654 69 1 1004 37.8% GAL 2 0 0 0 2 100.0% Attorneys, Unknown Role Type 50 17 13 1 19 51.4% Total Attorneys 26774 17490 472 23 8789 33.4% Non-attorneys Criminal Victim 687 473 180 14 20 3.9% Witness 5666 3174 1559 223 709 17.3% Other 3497 2198 941 46 312 12.2% Law Enforcement 10881 6925 1772 150 2030 22.3% Defendant 45129 24420 16000 487 4214 14.5% Civil Litigant 12946 6956 3594 202 2193 23.4% Witness 1892 1039 433 35 383 26.3% Other 110 64 27 2 17 20.5% Jurors 25631 11551 1871 542 11609 48.9% Employees 403 132 59 43 169 49.1% Total Non-attorneys 106842 56932 26436 1744 21656 26.9% Grand Total: 133616 74422 26908 1767 30445 28.5% 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 24 ## Page 28 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 versus Candidate B 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. Neither of the two surveys that make up this report, Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges and the Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges, are 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. 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 justice or 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. 25 ## Page 29 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges All County Judges Average Sample Size = 8789 A B C D Fail DK/NA Grade 1. Case Management: 1a.Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. 50% 18% 6% 1% 1% 24% 3.52 1b.Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 62% 24% 9% 3% 1% 1% 3.44 1c.Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. 47% 21% 7% 2% 1% 21% 3.39 1d.Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 57% 24% 9% 3% 2% 6% 3.39 Overall Case Management 3.44 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: 2a.Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 54% 25% 10% 4% 3% 3% 3.29 2b.Basing decisions on evidence and arguments. 49% 23% 12% 6% 4% 7% 3.16 2c.Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. 40% 18% 10% 6% 4% 22% 3.07 2d.Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are 48% 23% 9% 4% 3% 14% 3.27 similar. Overall Application and Knowledge of Law 3.20 3. Communications: 3a.Making sure all participants understand the proceedings. 66% 22% 7% 2% 1% 2% 3.53 3b.Providing written communications that are clear, thorough 41% 18% 8% 3% 2% 28% 3.30 and well reasoned. Overall Communications 3.42 4. Demeanor: 4a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 64% 21% 8% 3% 2% 1% 3.43 4b. Treating parties with respect. 67% 18% 8% 4% 3% 1% 3.43 4c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. 59% 20% 10% 6% 4% 1% 3.26 4d. Consistently applying laws and rules. 55% 22% 9% 5% 3% 5% 3.27 Overall Demeanor 3.35 5. Diligence: 5a.Using good judgment in application of relevant law and 52% 24% 11% 5% 4% 3% 3.20 rules. 5b.Doing the necessary homework and being prepared for 51% 23% 9% 4% 3% 10% 3.28 his/her cases. 5c.Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when 52% 18% 7% 3% 2% 18% 3.39 they are complicated and time consuming. Overall Diligence 3.29 Overall Average Grade: 3.33 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 26 ## Page 30 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average All County Judges Grade Sample Size = 8789 Would you say the judge is: Very biased in favor of the prosecution 9% Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution 28% Completely neutral 50% Somewhat biased in favor of the defense 6% Very biased in favor of the defense 2% Don't know or not sure 5% 8. How strongly do you recommend that the Judge be retained in office, or not be retained in office? [Percentages excluding undecided responses.] Strongly recommend retain 71% Somewhat recommend retain 17% Somewhat recommend not retain 6% Strongly recommend not retain 7% Total Retain 88% Total Not Retain 13% [Percentages including undecided responses.] Strongly recommend retain 68% Somewhat recommend retain 16% Undecided or Don't Know 5% Somewhat recommend not retain 6% Strongly recommend not retain 6% Total Retain 84% Undecided/Don't Know 5% Total Not Retain 12% 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey 27 ## Page 31 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges All County Judges Average Sample Size = 21656 A B C D Fail DK/NA Grade 1. Demeanor: 1a.Giving court proceedings a sense of dignity. 72% 18% 5% 2% 2% 1% 3.59 1b.Treating participants in the case politely and with respect. 76% 15% 4% 2% 3% 1% 3.61 1c.Conducting court in a neutral manner. 74% 15% 5% 2% 3% 1% 3.55 1d.Having a sense of compassion and human understanding 68% 18% 5% 3% 4% 2% 3.47 for those who appear before the court. Overall Demeanor 3.56 2. Fairness: 2a.Giving participants an opportunity to be heard. 75% 15% 4% 2% 3% 1% 3.59 2b.Treating those involved in the case without bias. 73% 14% 4% 3% 4% 2% 3.52 2c.Treating fairly people who represent themselves. 52% 10% 3% 2% 3% 29% 3.51 2d.Giving each side enough time to present his or her case. 72% 14% 4% 2% 3% 5% 3.59 Overall Fairness 3.55 3. Communications: 3a.Making sure participants understand the proceedings, and 76% 14% 5% 2% 2% 1% 3.64 what is going on in the courtroom. 3b.Using language that everyone can understand. 76% 16% 4% 1% 1% 1% 3.66 3c.Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear 79% 14% 4% 1% 1% 1% 3.69 what is being said. Overall Communications 3.66 4. Diligence: 4a.Beginning court on time 64% 21% 7% 3% 3% 3% 3.45 4b.Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 77% 15% 4% 1% 1% 1% 3.67 4c.Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 63% 16% 5% 2% 2% 13% 3.56 4d.Being prepared for cases. 71% 15% 4% 2% 2% 7% 3.61 4e.Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted 67% 20% 6% 2% 2% 2% 3.50 time. Overall Diligence 3.56 5. Application of Law: 5a.Giving reasons for rulings. 65% 16% 5% 2% 3% 8% 3.50 5b.Willing to make decisions without regard to possible 60% 12% 4% 2% 3% 19% 3.52 outside pressure. 5c.Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 67% 14% 4% 2% 4% 8% 3.50 Overall Application of Law 3.51 Overall Average Grade: 3.56 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 32 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average All County Judges Grade Sample Size = 21656 6. How biased do you think the Judge is toward the defense or prosecution? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Biased in favor of the prosecution total 12% Competely neutral 81% Biased in favor of the defense total 7% Average 0.12 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences generally handed down by Judge are? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Harsh sentencing total 12% Competely neutral 77% Lenient sentencing total 11% Average 0.06 2011 Interim Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 33 QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirreess ## Page 34 Colorado Judicial Performance Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Survey Questions _ Which of the following types of cases have you observed Judge (Last Name)’s performance? Please circle all that apply. (Only respondents who indicate they have observed the judge in “criminal other than traffic” cases will be asked question 2c and question 6.) Civil . 1 Criminal other than traffic . 2 Traffic . 3 Domestic . 4 Juvenile . 5 Probate . 6 Other . 9 1. Case Management: a. Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. A B C D F DK/NS b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. A B C D F DK/NS c. Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. A B C D F DK/NS d. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. A B C D F DK/NS 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: a. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. A B C D F DK/NS b. Basing decisions on evidence and arguments. A B C D F DK/NS c. Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. A B C D F DK/NS d. [Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar. A B C D F DK/NS 3. Communications: a. Makings sure all participants understand the proceedings. A B C D F DK/NS b. Providing written communications that are clear, thorough and well reasoned. A B C D F DK/NS 4. Demeanor: a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. A B C D F DK/NS b. Treating participants with respect. A B C D F DK/NS c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. A B C D F DK/NS d. Consistently applying laws and rules. A B C D F DK/NS 5. Diligence: a. Using good judgment in application of relevant law and rules. A B C D F DK/NS b. Doing the necessary “homework” and being prepared for his/her cases. A B C D F DK/NS c. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time consuming. A B C D F DK/NS 1 ## Page 35 Having observed Judge (Last Name) in a criminal case, would you say the judge is: (This question is asked only if respondent indicated at the beginning of the survey he/she observed the judge in a criminal case.) Very biased in favor of the prosecution . 1 Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution . 2 Completely Neutral . 3 Somewhat biased in favor of the defense . 4 Very biased in favor of the defense . 5 Don’t Know/Not Sure . 9 6. What would you say are Judge (Last Name)’s strengths? _ _ _ 7. What would you say are Judge (Last Name)’s weaknesses? _ _ _ 8. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how strongly do you recommend that Judge (Last Name) be retained in office, or not retained in office? Strongly recommend he be retained in office . 5 Somewhat recommend he be retained in office . 4 Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation . 3 Somewhat recommend he not be retained in office . 2 Strongly recommend he not be retained in office . 1 2 ## Page 36 9. And what would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s weaknesses? ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Commission on Judicial Performance ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Evaluation of 10. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how JUDGE [FULL NAME] 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 Somewhat recommend he/she be retained in office ............................ 4 Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation ............. 3 If we have made a mistake and you either were not in Judge [Last Somewhat recommend he/she not be retained in office ..................... 2 Name]’s courtroom in the past 18 months, or you feel that you do not Strongly recommend he/she not be retained in office ......................... 1 have sufficient experience with Judge [Last Name] to have an opinion the judge’s judicial performance, please just return this questionnaire, unanswered, in the enclosed postage-paid envelope, to stop any further requests to evaluate Judge [Last Name]. Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. Please place it in the self-addressed, postage-paid envelope provided and place it in the mail. Your participation in this survey is very much appreciated. 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 number corresponding to “Don’t Know/Not Applicable”—DK/NA). 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 understanding for those who appear before him/her. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ## Page 37 DK 6. [If you were in [Last Name]’s courtroom during a criminal case or 2. Fairness: A B C D F N/A cases please answer this question, otherwise skip to the next a. Giving participants an opportunity to be heard. 4 3 2 1 0 9 question.] On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate b. Treating those involved in the case without bias. 4 3 2 1 0 9 number how biased you think Judge [Last Name] is toward the defense or c. Treating fairly people who represent themselves. 4 3 2 1 0 9 the prosecution. If you feel Judge [Last Name] is completely unbiased, circle “0.” d. Giving each side enough time to present his or her case. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Bias toward Completely Bias toward Defense Neutral Prosecution DK 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 3. Communications: A B C D F N/A a. Makings sure participants understand the 7. [If you were in [Last Name]’s courtroom during a criminal case or proceedings, and what’s going on in the cases please answer this question, otherwise skip to the next courtroom. 4 3 2 1 0 9 question.] On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate b. Using language that everyone can understand. 4 3 2 1 0 9 number how lenient or how harsh you think the sentences generally handed c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom down by [Last Name] are. If you feel Judge [Last Name] generally hands can hear what’s being said. 4 3 2 1 0 9 down appropriate sentences, circle “0.” DK Sentences Appropriate Sentences 4. Diligence: A B C D F N/A Too Light Sentences Too Harsh a. Beginning court on time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. Being prepared for his/her cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Though your name will never be associated with your answers, because the judge will e. Managing court proceedings so that there is see a typed transcript of the comments that you and others write, it is important that little wasted time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 you do not include information in the comments below that would unintentionally identify you as the author. 8. What would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s strengths? 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 ___________________________________________________________ possible outside pressure. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ___________________________________________________________ c. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ___________________________________________________________ Continued on Back Page
  • 2012 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
    Read full retention survey textexpandcollapse

    ## Page 1 State of Colorado Logo COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE TThhee HHoonnoorraabbllee CChhrriissttiinnee AA.. CCaarrnneeyy 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 8th Judicial District ## Page 2 March 26, 2012 The Honorable Christine A. Carney Larimer County Justice Center 201 La Porte Ave., Suite 100 Ft. Collins, CO 80521 Dear Judge Carney: I am pleased to make available to you the attached copy of your 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report. This report includes the survey results from two important stakeholder groups: 1) attorneys who have had cases in your court or who are knowledgeable about your judicial performance; and 2) non-attorneys who have observed your performance in court or who have knowledge of your performance as a judge. In addition to this introduction, the report is divided into five main sections: 1. A brief summary of the results of the attorney and non-attorney surveys. 2. The numerical results of the survey of attorneys in both tabular and graphical form. In addition to the numerical results, this section also contains comments attorneys made about your judicial performance. In some instances the comments have been redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. A copy of the attorney questionnaire is included in the final section of this report. 3. The numerical results of the survey of non-attorneys in both tabular and graphical form. In addition to the numerical results, this section also contains comments these respondents made on the subject of your judicial performance. In few instances the comments have been redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. A copy of the non-attorney questionnaire is included in the final section of this report. 4. The fourth section of the report discusses the methodology of the surveys. 5. The final section provides copies of the questions or questionnaires that were used for each survey. ## Page 3 Hon. Christine A. Carney March 26, 2012 Page 2 If you have any questions about the methodology and how the survey was conducted, please feel free to contact me at 505-821-5454 or by email at sanderoff@rpinc.com (please put the words “Judicial Performance” in the subject line), and for any other questions you might have about the survey please call the Executive Director of the Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation, Jane Howell, at 303-866-6465. Best regards, Brian Sanderoff President enc: 5140 SAN FRANCISCO RD NE, ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87109 WWW.RPINC.COM 505-821-5454 ## Page 4 Summary of Results Respondents rated judges on various questions using an A to F scale, in which the grades were then converted to numerical scores: A= 4, B=3, C=2, D=1 and F=0. An average score of 4.0 is the highest possible score and a 0.0 is the lowest possible score. On average, Judge Christine A. Carney received an overall combined average grade of 3.72 in the 2012 Judicial Performance Survey. This is calculated by adding the overall average grade received from attorney respondents, 3.80, to the overall average grade received from non-attorney respondents, 3.64, divided by two. The average combined grade for all county judges standing for retention in 2012 is 3.45 [not shown below]. Judge Carney Average Grades (All Years) Combined Attorney Non-attorney Overall Grade 3.72 3.80 3.64 Sample Size - 187 267 Table 1 The results presented in this report are based on data collected in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. (See Methodology section for description of sampling process.) Provisional judges will not have samples for the years prior to their appointment. Table 2 shows Judge Carney’s overall average grades for each year in which survey results are available. Judge Carney Average Grades by Year Combined Attorney Non-Attorney Average Average Sample Average Sample Year Score Score Size Score Size 2008 3.73 3.87 18 3.58 33 2009 3.74 3.77 54 3.70 75 2010 3.78 3.82 65 3.73 50 2011 3.69 3.79 50 3.58 109 Overall 3.72 3.80 187 3.64 267 Table 2 1 ## Page 5 Comparison of Jurors vs. Non-Jurors Among Non-Attorney Population Among the non-attorney population, jurors tend to grade judges much higher than non- jurors. The juror overall average grade for all county judges standing for retention in 2012 is 3.85, while the overall average grade awarded by non-jurors is 3.29. The effect of this is that judges with a higher percentage of jurors in their sample tend to have higher average grades in the non-attorney survey than those judges with a small percentage of jurors. The number of jurors in a judge’s sample is, of course, closely related to the number of jury trials the judge presides over. The table below shows Judge Carney’s non-attorney results broken out by jurors and non-jurors. It also shows the overall average juror and non-juror grades for all county judges standing for retention in 2012 (see two columns on far right). Judge Carney Average Grades for Jurors vs. Non-Jurors (All Years) All County Judge Carney Retention Judges Jurors Non-Jurors Average Sample Average Sample Juror Non-Juror Score Size % Score Size % Average Average 3.89 128 48% 3.42 139 52% 3.85 3.29 Table 3 2 ## Page 6 SSuurrvveeyy ooff AAtoorrnneeyyss RReeggaarrddiinngg JJuuddggee CChhrriissttiinnee AA.. CCaarrnneeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 118877)) ## Page 7 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Sample Size = 187 A B C D Fail DK/NA Carney Retention Judges 1. Case Management: 1a. Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. 77% 10% 1% 0% 0% 12% 3.87 3.52 1b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 86% 13% 0% 0% 1% 0% 3.84 3.44 1c. Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. 76% 12% 2% 0% 1% 10% 3.80 3.41 1d. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 87% 11% 1% 0% 0% 2% 3.87 3.40 Overall Case Management 3.85 3.44 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: 2a. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 79% 13% 4% 1% 1% 2% 3.73 3.26 2b. Basing decisions on evidence and arguments. 82% 12% 3% 1% 1% 2% 3.78 3.15 2c. Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. 69% 15% 0% 1% 1% 15% 3.74 3.01 2d. Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are 82% 9% 2% 2% 1% 5% 3.79 3.28 similar. Overall Application and Knowledge of Law 3.76 3.18 3. Communications: 3a. Making sure all participants understand the proceedings. 83% 15% 1% 0% 1% 1% 3.81 3.49 3b. Providing written communications that are clear, thorough 70% 19% 1% 0% 1% 9% 3.74 3.31 and well reasoned. Overall Communications 3.78 3.40 4. Demeanor: 4a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 85% 14% 1% 0% 1% 0% 3.83 3.39 4b. Treating parties with respect. 88% 10% 1% 1% 1% 0% 3.85 3.36 4c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. 85% 11% 2% 1% 1% 0% 3.80 3.19 4d. Consistently applying laws and rules. 83% 11% 2% 2% 1% 2% 3.76 3.23 Overall Demeanor 3.81 3.29 5. Diligence: 5a. Using good judgment in application of relevant law and 80% 14% 2% 2% 1% 1% 3.73 3.18 rules. 5b. Doing the necessary homework and being prepared for 81% 14% 3% 0% 1% 2% 3.78 3.28 his/her cases. 5c. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when 72% 9% 1% 0% 0% 19% 3.88 3.38 they are complicated and time consuming. Overall Diligence 3.80 3.28 Overall Average Grade: 3.80 3.31 Note: Respondents rated judges on various questions using an A to F scale, in which the grades were then converted to numerical scores: A= 4, B=3, C=2, D=1 and F=0. An average score of 4.0 is the highest possible score and a 0.0 is the lowest possible score. 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 4 ## Page 8 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Percentage Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Carney Retention Sample Size = 187 Judges Would you say the judge is: Very biased in favor of the prosecution 3% 9% Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution 8% 30% Completely neutral 86% 49% Somewhat biased in favor of the defense 2% 5% Very biased in favor of the defense 0% 1% Don't know or not sure 1% 5% 8. How strongly do you recommend that the Judge be retained in office, or not be retained in office? Percentages excluding undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 94% 70% Somewhat recommend retain 4% 16% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 7% Strongly recommend not retain 1% 7% Total Retain 98% 86% Total Not Retain 2% 14% Percentages including undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 92% 66% Somewhat recommend retain 4% 15% Undecided or Don't Know 2% 5% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 6% Strongly recommend not retain 1% 7% Total Retain 96% 81% Undecided/Don't Know 2% 5% Total Not Retain 2% 13% 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 5 ## Page 9 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.80 Overall Average Grade 3.31 Q1. Overall Case Management 3.85 3.44 1a. Promptly issuing a decision on the 3.87 case after trial. 3.52 1b. Maintaining appropriate control over 3.84 proceedings. 3.44 3.80 1c. Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. 3.41 1d. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 3.87 3.40 3.76 Q2. Overall App & Knowledge of Law 3.18 2a. Being able to identify and analyze 3.73 relevant facts. 3.26 2b. Basing decisions on evidence and argument. 3.78 3.15 3.74 2c. Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. 3.01 2d. [Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences 3.79 when circumstances are similar. 3.28 3.78 Q3. Overall Communication 3.40 3a. Making sure all participants understand 3.81 the proceedings. 3.49 3b. Providing written communications that are 3.74 clear, thorough and well reasoned. 3.31 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney All County Retention Judges Judge Christine A. Carney 6 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 10 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.81 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.29 3.83 4a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 3.39 3.85 4b. Treating participants with respect. 3.36 4c. Conducting [his/her] courtroom 3.80 in a neutral manner. 3.19 3.76 4d. Consistently applying laws and rules. 3.23 3.80 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.28 5a. Using good judgment in application of 3.73 relevant laws and rules. 3.18 5b. Doing the necessary 'homework' and 3.78 being prepared for [his/her] cases. 3.28 5c. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even 3.88 when they are complicated and time consuming. 3.38 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Biased in favor of prosecution/defense. 3% Very biased in favor of the prosecution 9% 8% Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution 30% 86% Completely Neutral 49% 2% Somewhat biased in favor of the defense 5% 0% Very biased in favor of the defense 1% 1% Don't know/not sure 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Christine A. Carney All County Retention Judges 7 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 11 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Q8. How strongly do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained or not retained in office? Excluding Undecided/Don't Know Respondents 94% Strongly recommend retain 70% 4% Excluding Und/DK Respondents Somewhat recommend retain 16% All Cnty Retention Judge Carney Judges 1% Somewhat recommend not retain Total Retain 98% 86% 7% Total Not Retain 2% 14% 1% Strongly recommend not retain 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Including Undecided/Don't Know Respondents 92% Strongly recommend retain 66% 4% Somewhat recommend retain 15% Including Und/DK Respondents 2% Undecided or DK All Cnty 5% Retention Judge Carney Judges 1% Somewhat recommend not retain Total Retain 96% 81% 6% Undecided or DK 2% 5% Total Not Retain 2% 13% 1% Strongly recommend not retain 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Christine A. Carney All County Retention Judges 8 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 12 SSuurrvveeyy ooff NNoonn--AAtoorrnneeyyss RReeggaarrddiinngg JJuuddggee CChhrriissttiinnee AA.. CCaarrnneeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 226677)) ## Page 13 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Sample Size = 267 A B C D Fail DK/NA Carney Retention Judges 1. Demeanor: 1a. Giving court proceedings a sense of dignity. 77% 15% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3.66 3.59 1b. Treating participants in the case politely and with respect. 81% 11% 3% 2% 2% 2% 3.71 3.61 1c. Conducting court in a neutral manner. 79% 12% 3% 2% 3% 2% 3.65 3.56 1d. Having a sense of compassion and human understanding 69% 17% 5% 2% 4% 4% 3.50 3.48 for those who appear before the court. Overall Demeanor 3.63 3.56 2. Fairness: 2a. Giving participants an opportunity to be heard. 76% 14% 3% 1% 2% 3% 3.66 3.60 2b. Treating those involved in the case without bias. 75% 12% 4% 2% 3% 4% 3.60 3.53 2c. Treating fairly people who represent themselves. 48% 11% 2% 1% 3% 36% 3.56 3.53 2d. Giving each side enough time to present his or her case. 75% 13% 2% 2% 2% 7% 3.71 3.60 Overall Fairness 3.63 3.57 3. Communications: 3a. Making sure participants understand the proceedings, and 79% 13% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3.71 3.64 what is going on in the courtroom. 3b. Using language that everyone can understand. 79% 14% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3.73 3.67 3c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear 79% 16% 2% 0% 1% 2% 3.75 3.71 what is being said. Overall Communications 3.73 3.67 4. Diligence: 4a. Beginning court on time 71% 14% 6% 3% 2% 5% 3.55 3.49 4b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 78% 13% 3% 1% 2% 3% 3.70 3.69 4c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 62% 17% 1% 2% 1% 17% 3.63 3.59 4d. Being prepared for cases. 72% 13% 2% 2% 2% 10% 3.69 3.62 4e. Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted 69% 20% 4% 0% 2% 4% 3.61 3.52 time. Overall Diligence 3.64 3.58 5. Application of Law: 5a. Giving reasons for rulings. 65% 16% 4% 2% 3% 10% 3.54 3.51 5b. Willing to make decisions without regard to possible 60% 14% 1% 1% 2% 21% 3.63 3.53 outside pressure. 5c. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 70% 13% 3% 2% 2% 10% 3.64 3.52 Overall Application of Law 3.60 3.52 Overall Average Grade: 3.64 3.58 Note: Respondents rated judges on various questions using an A to F scale, in which the grades were then converted to numerical scores: A= 4, B=3, C=2, D=1 and F=0. An average score of 4.0 is the highest possible score and a 0.0 is the lowest possible score. 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 10 ## Page 14 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Percentage Judge Christine A. Carney Christine A. All County Carney Retention Sample Size = 267 Judges 6. How biased do you think the Judge is toward the defense or prosecution? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Biased in favor of the prosecution total 10% 12% Competely neutral 84% 82% Biased in favor of the defense total 4% 6% [A positive average indicates bias toward prosecution, and a Average 0.19 0.15 negative average indicates a bias toward the defense.] 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences generally handed down by Judge are? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Harsh sentencing total 15% 12% Competely neutral 80% 78% Lenient sentencing total 7% 10% [A positive average indicates sentences are harsh, and a Average 0.25 0.14 negative average indicates sentences are lenient.] 10. How strongly do you recommend that the Judge be retained or not retained in office? Percentages excluding undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 86% 84% Somewhat recommend retain 9% 8% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 3% Strongly recommend not retain 4% 5% Total Retain 95% 92% Total Not Retain 5% 8% Percentages including undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 78% 77% Somewhat recommend retain 8% 7% Undecided or Don't Know 10% 8% Somewhat recommend not retain 1% 2% Strongly recommend not retain 3% 5% Total Retain 86% 84% Undecided/Don't Know 10% 8% Total Not Retain 4% 7% 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 11 ## Page 15 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.64 Overall Average Grade 3.58 3.63 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.56 3.66 1a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 3.59 1b. Treating participants politely and with respect. 3.71 3.61 1c. Conducting the courtroom in a neutral 3.65 manner. 3.56 1d. Having a sense of compassion and human 3.50 understanding for those who appear before the judge. 3.48 3.63 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.57 2a. Giving participants an opportunity to be 3.66 heard. 3.60 2b. Treating those involved in the 3.60 case without bias. 3.53 2c. Treats people fairly who represent 3.56 themselves. 3.53 2d. Giving each side enough time to present his 3.71 or her case. 3.60 3.73 Q3. Overall Communications 3.67 3a. Making sure participants understand the 3.71 proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom. 3.64 3b. Using language that everyone can 3.73 understand. 3.67 3c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom 3.75 can hear what's being said. 3.71 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney All County Retention Judges Judge Christine A. Carney 12 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 16 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average Grades 3.64 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.58 3.55 4a. Beginning court on time. 3.49 4b. Maintaining appropriate control over 3.70 proceedings. 3.69 4c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 3.63 3.59 4d. Being prepared for his or her cases. 3.69 3.62 4e. Managing court proceedings so that there is 3.61 little wasted time. 3.52 3.60 Q5. Overall Application of Law 3.52 3.54 5a. Giving reasons for rulings. 3.51 5b. Willing to make decision without regard to 3.63 possible outside pressure. 3.53 5c. Being able to identify and analyze 3.64 relevant facts. 3.52 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Q6 Biased in favor of prosecution/defense. 1 0.19 Christine A. Carney 0.15 All County Retention Judges -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5   Defense Prosecution 1-A negative average score indicates bias toward the defense, and a positive average score indicates bias toward prosecution. Q7 Lenience or Harshness in Sentencing. 2 0.25 Christine A. Carney 0.14 All County Retention Judges -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5   Lenient Harsh 2-A negative average score indicates sentences are lenient, and a positive average score indicates sentences are harsh. Christine A. Carney All County Retention Judges 13 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 17 Judge Christine A. Carney Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Q10. How strongly do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained or not retained in office? Excluding Undecided/Don't Know Respondents 86% Strongly recommend retain in office 84% 9% Somewhat recommend retain in office Excluding Und/DK Respondents 8% All Cnty Retention 1% Somewhat recommend not retain in office Judge Carney Judges 3% Total Retain 95% 92% Total Not Retain 5% 8% 4% Strongly recommend not retain in office 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Including Undecided /Don't Know Respondents 78% Strongly recommend retain in office 77% 8% Somewhat recommend retain in office 7% 10% Including Und/DK Respondents Undecided 8% All Cnty Retention 1% Judge Carney Judges Somewhat recommend not retain in office Total Retain 86% 84% 2% Undecided 10% 8% 3% Total Not Retain 4% 7% Strongly recommend not retain in office 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Christine A. Carney All County Retention Judges 14 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 18 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy ## Page 19 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy The results shown in the 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report are based on two surveys: The Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges, and the Survey of Non- Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges. Below is a description of the methodology used in the two surveys. I Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges a. Sample: Research & Polling, Inc. received case data with the names of attorneys who had likely been in each judge’s courtroom from the following primary sources:  Colorado Judicial Department  Colorado District Attorneys’ Council  Colorado Public Defender’s Office  Denver County Courts  District Attorney’s Office, Second Judicial District (Denver)  District Attorney’s Office, Ninth Judicial District The data from these different sources are combined, duplicates removed, and addresses corrected. In 2011, the following changes were made to the Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges survey process:  Only judges that are standing for retention in 2012 were evaluated during this reporting cycle (the intent was to increase the number of completed attorney evaluations for each retention judge by excluding those not standing for retention).  The number of possible judges that attorney respondents could evaluate was increased from seven to 10. Attorneys are first mailed a letter inviting them to complete the survey online. The letter provides the link to the online survey, as well as a unique password to access the survey. Approximately one week later, attorneys are sent an email invitation to complete the online survey, which also provides the Web address and their unique password. About a week after the first email is sent, a reminder email is sent, providing the same information. Potential respondents who do not complete the survey after the second email are then telephoned and asked to either complete the survey by phone, or to complete it online. Since 2010, the Judicial Performance Survey reports are based on a moving average, or rolling sample, of data collected over a period of time equal to the justice’s or judge’s term of office: ten years for a Supreme Court justice, eight years for a COA judge, six years for a district judge, and four years for a county judge. To use a county judge as an 16 ## Page 20 example: as survey data is collected it is pooled together for four years. After four years, as new data is added to the judge’s survey results, the oldest data in the pool is deleted. b. Questions: Respondents evaluated judges on 17 aspects of judicial performance using a grade scale of A, B, C, D, or F. (See Questionnaire section.) These grades were then converted to a numerical score where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. The A through F scale was chosen because it is almost universally recognized and understood. This makes it easy for respondents to complete their questionnaire, and for the public to interpret the results. Respondents were also asked if they considered the judge biased toward the defense or prosecution in criminal cases. In a final question, respondents were asked to indicate how strongly they would recommend that the justice or judge be retained or not retained in office. c. Comments: Respondents were also asked what they considered to be the judge’s strengths and weaknesses. By statute, these comments are confidential and only provided to the judge and the District Commission on Judicial Performance. They are not released to the public when the rest of the report is released. Before being given to the judge and the Commission, an attempt is made to redact all respondent identifying information from the comments. Since 2005, there have been changes to the number of comment questions asked, though the strengths and weaknesses questions have been posed in every survey. The number to the left of each comment refers to the same attorney respondent in both the strengths section and the weaknesses section. Most spelling and typographical errors have been corrected. d. Analysis: The Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section first shows a table of the percentage distribution for each of the A through F questions, including “don’t know/not applicable” responses. The next column to the right shows the judge’s average grade for each question. For comparison purposes, averages were also computed for all county judges standing for retention in 2012 and are shown in the furthest right column on the page. Tables showing the percentage distribution for all questions for all county retention judges are located at the end of this methodology section. The overall question averages are calculated by adding up the averages for each question and dividing by the number of questions. The next table shows the percentage distribution of the responses to the question about recommending retention. The first column of percentages is for the report-judge and the second column displays the percentages for all county retention judges. The 17 ## Page 21 percentages are shown both including and excluding “undecided/don’t know” responses. The next page displays the question averages in horizontal bar-graph form. The percentage distribution to the retention question is then presented in the graph on the next page. The third part of the Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section of the report lists the comments the attorneys made about the judge’s strengths and weaknesses. e. Cooperation Rate: The overall cooperation rate for the Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Survey is calculated as the number of completed survey evaluations divided by the number of possible evaluations resulting in an overall response rate of 45.7% for district judges and 37.6% for county judges. An equivalent response rate for an individual judge is computed in the same manner. II Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges a. Sample: Research & Polling, Inc. received case data with the names of non-attorneys who had likely been in each judge’s courtroom from the following primary sources:  Colorado Judicial Department  Colorado District Attorneys’ Council  Colorado Public Defender’s Office  Denver County Courts  District Attorney’s Office, Second Judicial District (Denver)  District Attorney’s Office, Ninth Judicial District The data from these different sources are combined, duplicates removed, and addresses corrected. In 2011, only the judges standing for retention in 2012 were evaluated. The intent was to increase the number of completed non-attorney evaluations for each retention judge by excluding those not standing for retention. For this evaluation cycle, the following changes were made to the Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges survey process:  Court staff, probation officers, and court interpreters were asked to complete the survey online, with the possibility of evaluating up to 10 judges  RPI surveyed all non-attorneys with courtroom experience instead of a random sample of each sub-population (i.e. court employees, court interpreters, probation officers, witnesses, law enforcement personnel, jurors, crime victims, litigants, etc.). The only exception to this is the criminal defendants, for which RPI selected a random sample. 18 ## Page 22 As stated above, court staff, probation officers, and court interpreters were asked to complete the survey online. They are sent an email invitation to complete the online survey, which also provides the Web address and their unique password. About a week after the first email is sent, a reminder email is sent, providing the same information. Other non-attorneys were surveyed via standard mail. First, they were mailed an initial postcard informing the recipient that he or she would be receiving a questionnaire. Two to three weeks after the postcard was mailed, the potential respondent was sent a personalized introductory letter and a questionnaire with a postage-paid return envelope. If the person did not respond, a second questionnaire and letter were sent approximately four weeks later. Questionnaires are barcoded, and if a respondent mailed back two questionnaires, the second one was deleted from the data file. Since 2010, the non-attorney section of the Judicial Performance Survey reports have been based on a moving average, or rolling sample, of survey results collected over a period of time equal to the judge’s term of office: six years for a district judge and four years for a county judge. To use a county judge as an example: as survey data is collected, it is pooled together for four years. After four years, as new data is added to the judge’s survey results, the oldest data in the pool is deleted. b. Questions: Respondents evaluated judges on 19 aspects of judicial performance using a grade scale of A, B, C, D, or F. (See Questionnaire section.) These grades were then converted to a numerical score where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. The A through F scale was chosen because it is almost universally recognized and understood. This makes it easy for respondents to complete their questionnaire, and for the public to interpret the results. Respondents were also asked if they considered the judge biased toward the defense or prosecution in criminal cases. In a final question, respondents were asked to indicate how strongly they would recommend that the justice or judge be retained or not retained in office. A copy of the questionnaire is included in the last section of this report. c. Analysis: The Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section first shows a table of the percentage distribution for each of the A through F questions, including “don’t know/not applicable” responses. The next column to the right shows the judge’s average grade for each question. For comparison purposes, averages were also computed for all county judges standing for retention in 2012 and are shown in the furthest right column on the page. Tables showing the percentage distribution for all questions for all county retention judges are located at the end of this methodology section. The overall question averages are calculated by adding up the averages for each question and dividing by the number of questions. 19 ## Page 23 The next table shows the percentage distribution of the responses to the questions about prosecution or defense bias and recommending retention. The first column of percentages is for the report-judge and the second column displays the percentages for all county retention judges. The percentages for the retention question are shown including and excluding “undecided/don’t know” responses. The next page displays the question averages in horizontal bar-graph form. The percentage distribution of the prosecution-defense bias and retention questions are then presented in the graph on the next page. The third part of the Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges section of the report lists the comments the non-attorneys made about the judge’s strengths and weaknesses. d. Comments: In addition to the A through F questions, non-attorney respondents were asked what they considered to be the judge’s strengths and weaknesses. By statute, these comments are confidential and only provided to the judge and the District Commission on Judicial Performance. They are not released to the public when the rest of the report is released. Before being given to the judge and the Commission, an attempt is made to redact all respondent identifying information from the comments. Since 2005 there have been changes to the number of comment questions asked, though the strengths and weaknesses questions have been posed in every survey. The number to the left of each comment refers to the same non-attorney respondent in both the strengths section and the weaknesses section. e. Cooperation Rate: The estimated cooperation rate for the non-attorney survey 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 and refusals, undeliverables, and other responses. The table presents the estimated overall cooperation rate as well as the cooperation rate by the different types of respondents. The true cooperation rates are likely higher than shown because of the percentage of people who were mailed questionnaires about judges with whom they may not have had sufficient experience. 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 table of the response counts by respondent type for Judge Carney is shown on the following page, and on the next page is a table of the overall cooperation rates for both the Attorney and Non-Attorney Regarding Trial Judges surveys for all county judges. 20 ## Page 24 Judge Christine A. Carney Judge Response Counts by Type of Respondent Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Coop Role Type Sent Response Not Applicable Responses Completes Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 64 34 7 0 23 40.4% Defense Attorneys 268 131 20 0 117 47.2% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 28 19 0 0 9 32.1% Other Attorneys Civil 116 69 9 0 38 35.5% Total Attorneys 476 253 36 0 187 42.5% Non-attorneys Criminal Witness 155 85 47 7 16 14.8% Law Enforcement 117 58 22 10 27 28.4% Defendant 825 408 342 7 68 14.1% Civil Litigant 125 75 31 6 13 13.8% Witness 21 15 1 2 3 15.0% Other 1 1 0 0 0 0.0% Jurors 252 105 11 8 128 53.1% Employees, including Interpreters 17 4 4 0 9 69.2% Probation Officers 5 1 1 0 3 75.0% Total Non-attorneys 1518 752 459 40 267 25.2% Grand Total: 1994 1005 495 40 454 30.3% 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 21 ## Page 25 Total Response Counts by Type of Respondent for All County Retention Judges Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Completes Cooperation Sent Response Not Applicable Responses Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 2049 1103 289 0 657 37.3% Defense Attorneys 8880 5065 774 0 3041 37.5% Other Attorneys Criminal 12 7 1 0 4 36.4% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 441 266 30 0 145 35.3% Other Attorneys Civil 1346 701 191 0 454 39.3% Attorneys, Unknown Role Type 24 8 7 1 8 47.1% Total Attorneys 12752 7150 1292 1 4309 37.6% Non-attorneys Criminal Victim 277 159 90 15 13 7.0% Witness 4435 2510 1368 182 375 12.2% Other 549 334 156 20 39 9.9% Law Enforcement 3638 2574 457 92 515 16.2% Defendant 24165 11842 9981 329 2013 14.2% Civil Litigant 4982 2497 1744 118 623 19.2% Witness 1544 856 331 44 313 25.8% Other 78 50 20 2 6 10.3% Jurors 11310 5027 1133 268 4882 48.0% Employees, including Interpreters 666 182 95 12 377 66.0% Probation Officers 415 109 97 5 204 64.2% Total Non-attorneys 52059 26140 15472 1087 9360 25.6% Grand Total: 64811 33290 16764 1088 13669 28.4% 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 22 ## Page 26 A Final Word Regarding the Survey Results The most frequently asked question that we receive from judges regarding the survey statistics is, “What is the margin of sampling error associated with these results?” The answer to this question is that a margin of error cannot be calculated since we are not selecting a random sample of eligible respondents (attorneys and non-attorneys) to be surveyed; instead, we are attempting to survey all members of the eligible population. Since we are not generating a random sample, we cannot estimate a percentage or value of the population sampled with a known probability of error. Every eligible respondent in the attorney and non-attorney population is now given an opportunity to evaluate judges with whom they have had a recent experience.1 The only exception is among the criminal defendant population, in which, due to its size, a random sample is selected. The respondents know the purpose and content of the survey, and based on that, decide whether to respond to it. Measures are taken to increase the response rate so that concerns regarding sampling bias can be mitigated. The higher the response rate, the more confident we can feel the results of the respondents are similar to the results of the non- respondents. Attorneys and non-attorneys receive multiple waves of reminders via email or mail to complete the survey. Further, all non-responding attorneys are then contacted on the telephone and given the opportunity to complete the evaluation with the professional interviewer. RPI has contacted hundreds of non-responding attorneys to encourage their participation. We have been informed by the vast majority of the non-responding attorneys that the primary reason for not participating in the survey is because of a lack of sufficient information to evaluate that particular judge. The Judicial Performance Evaluation Survey is a valuable means, perhaps the only practical means, for the Commissions on Judicial Performance to have a summary of results from structured interviews among stakeholders who have courtroom familiarity with each judge being evaluated. We are continuing to take steps to increase cell sizes and cooperation rates for each judge in order to further enhance this evaluation program. 1 Attorneys have the opportunity to evaluate up to 10 judges on an online survey. Among the non- attorney population, court staff, probation officers, and interpreters also have the opportunity to evaluate up to 10 judges on an online survey. The remaining non-attorney populations are mailed a paper survey with the opportunity to evaluate one judge. 23 ## Page 27 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges All County Retention Judges Average Sample Size = 4309 A B C D Fail DK/NA Grade 1. Case Management: 1a.Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. 50% 17% 5% 1% 1% 25% 3.52 1b.Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 63% 23% 9% 3% 2% 1% 3.44 1c.Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. 48% 21% 7% 2% 1% 21% 3.41 1d.Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 57% 24% 9% 3% 2% 5% 3.40 Overall Case Management 3.44 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: 2a.Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 55% 24% 11% 5% 3% 3% 3.26 2b.Basing decisions on evidence and arguments. 51% 23% 12% 6% 4% 4% 3.15 2c.Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. 38% 18% 10% 6% 5% 23% 3.01 2d.Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are 50% 23% 10% 4% 3% 11% 3.28 similar. Overall Application and Knowledge of Law 3.18 3. Communications: 3a.Making sure all participants understand the proceedings. 65% 22% 8% 2% 1% 2% 3.49 3b.Providing written communications that are clear, thorough 41% 17% 7% 3% 2% 30% 3.31 and well reasoned. Overall Communications 3.40 4. Demeanor: 4a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 64% 20% 9% 4% 3% 1% 3.39 4b. Treating parties with respect. 65% 17% 9% 4% 4% 1% 3.36 4c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. 58% 19% 10% 6% 5% 1% 3.19 4d. Consistently applying laws and rules. 55% 20% 10% 5% 4% 5% 3.23 Overall Demeanor 3.29 5. Diligence: 5a.Using good judgment in application of relevant law and 52% 23% 11% 6% 4% 3% 3.18 rules. 5b.Doing the necessary homework and being prepared for 51% 22% 9% 4% 3% 11% 3.28 his/her cases. 5c.Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they 53% 16% 7% 3% 2% 18% 3.38 are complicated and time consuming. Overall Diligence 3.28 Overall Average Grade: 3.31 Note: Respondents rated judges on various questions using an A to F scale, in which the grades were then converted to numerical scores: A= 4, B=3, C=2, D=1 and F=0. An average score of 4.0 is the highest possible score and a 0.0 is the lowest possible score. 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 24 ## Page 28 Survey of Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average All County Retention Judges Grade Sample Size = 4309 Would you say the judge is: Very biased in favor of the prosecution 9% Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution 30% Completely neutral 49% Somewhat biased in favor of the defense 5% Very biased in favor of the defense 1% Don't know or not sure 5% 8. How strongly do you recommend that the Judge be retained in office, or not be retained in office? Percentages excluding undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 70% Somewhat recommend retain 16% Somewhat recommend not retain 7% Strongly recommend not retain 7% Total Retain 86% Total Not Retain 14% Percentages including undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 66% Somewhat recommend retain 15% Undecided or Don't Know 5% Somewhat recommend not retain 6% Strongly recommend not retain 7% Total Retain 81% Undecided/Don't Know 5% Total Not Retain 13% 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report 25 ## Page 29 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges All County Retention Judges Average Sample Size = 9360 A B C D Fail DK/NA Grade 1. Demeanor: 1a.Giving court proceedings a sense of dignity. 73% 17% 5% 2% 2% 1% 3.59 1b.Treating participants in the case politely and with respect. 77% 14% 4% 2% 2% 1% 3.61 1c.Conducting court in a neutral manner. 74% 15% 5% 2% 3% 1% 3.56 1d.Having a sense of compassion and human understanding 70% 16% 5% 3% 4% 2% 3.48 for those who appear before the court. Overall Demeanor 3.56 2. Fairness: 2a.Giving participants an opportunity to be heard. 75% 15% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3.60 2b.Treating those involved in the case without bias. 73% 14% 4% 2% 4% 2% 3.53 2c.Treating fairly people who represent themselves. 53% 10% 3% 2% 3% 29% 3.53 2d.Giving each side enough time to present his or her case. 72% 14% 4% 2% 3% 5% 3.60 Overall Fairness 3.57 3. Communications: 3a.Making sure participants understand the proceedings, and 77% 14% 4% 2% 2% 1% 3.64 what is going on in the courtroom. 3b.Using language that everyone can understand. 77% 16% 4% 1% 1% 1% 3.67 3c.Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear 79% 14% 3% 1% 1% 1% 3.71 what is being said. Overall Communications 3.67 4. Diligence: 4a.Beginning court on time 66% 20% 6% 3% 3% 3% 3.49 4b.Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 78% 14% 4% 1% 1% 2% 3.69 4c.Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 64% 16% 4% 2% 2% 13% 3.59 4d.Being prepared for cases. 72% 14% 4% 2% 2% 7% 3.62 4e.Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted 68% 19% 6% 2% 2% 2% 3.52 time. Overall Diligence 3.58 5. Application of Law: 5a.Giving reasons for rulings. 66% 17% 5% 2% 3% 8% 3.51 5b.Willing to make decisions without regard to possible 61% 12% 4% 2% 3% 18% 3.53 outside pressure. 5c.Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 67% 14% 4% 2% 4% 8% 3.52 Overall Application of Law 3.52 Overall Average Grade: 3.58 Note: Respondents rated judges on various questions using an A to F scale, in which the grades were then converted to numerical scores: A= 4, B=3, C=2, D=1 and F=0. An average score of 4.0 is the highest possible score and a 0.0 is the lowest possible score. 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 30 Survey of Non-Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Average All County Retention Judges Grade Sample Size = 9360 6. How biased do you think the Judge is toward the defense or prosecution? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Biased in favor of the prosecution total 12% Competely neutral 82% Biased in favor of the defense total 6% Average 0.15 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences generally handed down by Judge are? [Please see the questionnaire at the end of report for question wording.] Harsh sentencing total 12% Competely neutral 78% Lenient sentencing total 10% Average 0.14 10. How strongly do you recommend that the Judge be retained or not retained in office? Percentages excluding undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 84% Somewhat recommend retain 8% Somewhat recommend not retain 3% Strongly recommend not retain 5% Total Retain 92% Total Not Retain 8% Percentages including undecided/don't know responses. Strongly recommend retain 77% Somewhat recommend retain 7% Undecided or Don't Know 8% Somewhat recommend not retain 2% Strongly recommend not retain 5% Total Retain 84% Undecided/Don't Know 8% Total Not Retain 7% 2012 Judicial Performance Survey Report ## Page 31 QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirreess ## Page 32 Colorado Judicial Performance Attorneys Regarding Trial Judges Survey Questions _ Which of the following types of cases have you observed Judge (Last Name)’s performance? Please circle all that apply. (Only respondents who indicate they have observed the judge in “criminal other than traffic” cases will be asked question 2d and the “bias” question between 5 and 6.) Civil . 1 Criminal other than traffic . 2 Traffic . 3 Domestic . 4 Juvenile . 5 Probate . 6 Other . 9 Using a grade scale, where an "A" is excellent along with B, C, D or F for fail, please grade Judge [Last Name] on the following. If, for a specific question you feel that you do not have enough information to grade the judge, please check DK/NA for Don't Know/Not Applicable. 1. Case Management: a. Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. A B C D F DK/NA b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. A B C D F DK/NA c. Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. A B C D F DK/NA d. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. A B C D F DK/NA 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: a. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. A B C D F DK/NA b. Basing decisions on evidence and arguments. A B C D F DK/NA c. Willing to reconsider error in fact or law. A B C D F DK/NA d. [Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar. A B C D F DK/NA 3. Communications: a. Makings sure all participants understand the proceedings. A B C D F DK/NA b. Providing written communications that are clear, thorough and well reasoned. A B C D F DK/NA 4. Demeanor: a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. A B C D F DK/NA b. Treating participants with respect. A B C D F DK/NA c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner. A B C D F DK/NA d. Consistently applying laws and rules. A B C D F DK/NA 1 ## Page 33 5. Diligence: a. Using good judgment in application of relevant law and rules. A B C D F DK/NA b. Doing the necessary “homework” and being prepared for his/her cases. A B C D F DK/NA c. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time consuming. A B C D F DK/NA Having observed Judge (Last Name) in a criminal case, would you say the judge is: (This question is asked only if respondent indicated at the beginning of the survey he/she observed the judge in a criminal case.) Very biased in favor of the prosecution . 1 Somewhat biased in favor of the prosecution . 2 Completely Neutral . 3 Somewhat biased in favor of the defense . 4 Very biased in favor of the defense . 5 Don’t Know/Not Sure . 9 6. What would you say are Judge (Last Name)’s strengths? _ _ _ 7. What would you say are Judge (Last Name)’s weaknesses? _ _ _ 8. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how strongly do you recommend that Judge (Last Name) be retained in office, or not be retained in office? Strongly recommend he be retained in office . 5 Somewhat recommend he be retained in office . 4 Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation . 3 Somewhat recommend he not be retained in office . 2 Strongly recommend he not be retained in office . 1 2 ## Page 34 9. And what would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s weaknesses? ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Commission on Judicial Performance ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Evaluation of 10. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how JUDGE [FULL NAME] 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 Somewhat recommend he/she be retained in office ............................ 4 Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation ............. 3 If we have made a mistake and you either were not in Judge [Last Somewhat recommend he/she not be retained in office ..................... 2 Name]’s courtroom or you feel that you do not have sufficient Strongly recommend he/she not be retained in office ......................... 1 experience with Judge [Last Name] to have an opinion the judge’s judicial performance, please just return this questionnaire, unanswered, in the enclosed postage-paid envelope, to stop any further requests to evaluate Judge [Last Name]. Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. Please place it in the self-addressed, postage-paid envelope provided and place it in the mail. Your participation in this survey is very much appreciated. 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 number corresponding to “Don’t Know/Not Applicable”—DK/NA). 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 understanding for those who appear before him/her. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Barcode ## Page 35 DK 6. [If you were in [Last Name]’s courtroom during a criminal case or 2. Fairness: A B C D F N/A cases please answer this question, otherwise skip to the next a. Giving participants an opportunity to be heard. 4 3 2 1 0 9 question.] On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate b. Treating those involved in the case without bias. 4 3 2 1 0 9 number how biased you think Judge [Last Name] is toward the defense or c. Treating fairly people who represent themselves. 4 3 2 1 0 9 the prosecution. If you feel Judge [Last Name] is completely unbiased, circle “0.” d. Giving each side enough time to present his or her case. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Bias toward Completely Bias toward Defense Neutral Prosecution DK 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 3. Communications: A B C D F N/A a. Makings sure participants understand the 7. [If you were in [Last Name]’s courtroom during a criminal case or proceedings, and what’s going on in the cases please answer this question, otherwise skip to the next courtroom. 4 3 2 1 0 9 question.] On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate b. Using language that everyone can understand. 4 3 2 1 0 9 number how lenient or how harsh you think the sentences generally handed c. Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom down by [Last Name] are. If you feel Judge [Last Name] generally hands can hear what’s being said. 4 3 2 1 0 9 down appropriate sentences, circle “0.” DK Sentences Appropriate Sentences 4. Diligence: A B C D F N/A Too Light Sentences Too Harsh a. Beginning court on time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. Being prepared for his/her cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Though your name will never be associated with your answers, because the judge will e. Managing court proceedings so that there is see a typed transcript of the comments that you and others write, it is important that little wasted time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 you do not include information in the comments below that would unintentionally identify you as the author. 8. What would you say are Judge [Last Name]’s strengths? 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 ___________________________________________________________ possible outside pressure. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ___________________________________________________________ c. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 4 3 2 1 0 9 ___________________________________________________________ Continued on Back Page
• 2008 cycle
  • 2008 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
    Read full retention survey textexpandcollapse

    ## Page 1 State off Colorado LLogo COOMMISSIOON ON JUUDICIALL PERFORRMANCEE CChhhhrriissttiinnnnee AA.. CCCCaarrnneeeyy 22008 Juudicial PPerformmance Suurvey ## Page 2 April 30, 2008 The Honorable Christine A. Carney Loveland Police & Crts. Bldg. 810 E. 10th Street, Suite 110 Loveland, CO. 80537 Dear Judge Carney: 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 four 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. • 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 The Honorable Christine A. Carney April, 30 2008 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 ext 1, and for any other questions you might have about the survey please call the Executive Director of the Colorado Judicial Performance Program, Jane Howell, at 303-837-3665. Best regards, Paul A. Talmey President enc: ## Page 4 AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 6611)) ## Page 5 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Overall and by Section 33..77 Overall Average 3.4 3.4 3.7 Q1. Overall Case 33.55 Management 3.4 3.7 Q2. Overall App & 3.3 Knowldge of Law 3.3 3.9 Q3. Overall 3.7 Communications 3.7 3.8 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.4 3.5 3.8 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 AAvveerraaggee GGrraaddee Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 6 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Case Management 3.7 Q1. Overall Case Management 3.5 3.4 3.8 1a. Promptly making rulings 3.6 during trial 3.6 33.77 1b. Beginning court on time 3.4 3.5 3.8 1c. Allotting appropriate amount 3.4 of time for cases 3.4 3.7 1d. Keeping cases moving 3.5 according to schedule 3.5 2.9 1e. [Civil only] Assisting parties to 3.1 reach agreement 3.0 3.8 1f. Maintaining appropriate 3.6 control over proceedings 3.5 3.8 1g. Promptly ruling on pre-trial 3.4 motions 3.3 3.8 1h. Promptly issuing a decision 3.6 on the case after trial 3.5 3.8 1i. Setting reasonable schedules 3.5 for cases 33.44 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 7 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.7 Q2. Overall App & Knowldge of 3.3 LLaaww 3.3 3.7 2a. Basing decisions on evidence 3.3 and arguments 3.3 3.7 2b. Giving reasons for rulings 3.3 3.4 3.7 2c. [Civil only] Issuing written 3.1 findings of fact and law 3.2 3.5 2d. Willing to reconsider error in 2.9 ffaacctt oorr llaaww 2.9 3.7 2e. Having knowledge of relevant 3.3 substantive law 3.3 3.8 2f. Having knowledge of rules of 3.4 pprroocceedduurree aanndd eevviiddeennccee 3.4 3.7 2g. Being able to identify and 3.4 analyze relevant facts 3.4 3.7 2h. [Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences when the 3.4 circumstances are similar 3.3 3.7 2i. Willing to make decision without regard to possible 3.4 criticism 3.4 3.8 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 Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 8 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Communications 3.9 Q3. Overall Communications 3.7 3.7 3.9 3a. Speaking clearly 3.7 3.7 3.8 3b. Making sure all participants 3.6 understand the proceedings 3.6 3.9 3c. Using understandable 3.7 language 3.7 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 9 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Demeanor 3.8 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.4 3.5 3.8 4a. Giving proceedings a sense 3.5 of dignity 3.5 3.8 4b. Treating everyone involved 3.5 politely 33.44 3.6 4c. Having empathy with the 3.3 parties involved 3.3 3.8 4d. Treating participants with 3.5 respect 3.5 3.8 4e. Presenting a neutral 3.3 presence on the bench 3.4 3.9 4f. Being consistent in [his/her] 3.5 behavior 3.5 33.88 4g. Conducting [his/her] 3.4 courtroom in a neutral manner 3.4 3.9 4h. Giving all participants an 3.6 opportunity to be heard 3.6 3.9 44ii. CCoonnssiisstteennttllyy aappppllyyiinngg llaawwss 3.4 and rules 3.4 3.9 4j. Not engaging in ex parte 3.6 communications 3.7 4.0 44kk. TTrreeaattiinngg pprroo ssee ppaarrttiieess ffaaiirrllyy 33.66 3.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 10 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Diligence 3.8 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.4 3.8 55aa. MMaakkiinngg ttoouugghh ddeecciissiioonnss wwhheenn 3.4 necessary 3.4 3.8 5b. Using good judgment in apppplication of relevant law and 3.3 rules 3.3 3.8 5c. Doing the necessary 'homework' and being prepared 3.4 for [[his/her]] cases 3.4 3.9 5d. Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are 3.4 complicated and time consuming 33.55 3.8 5e. Providing prompt access to 3.4 the court in emergency matters 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 11 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Q6. Average: How biased do you think Judge Carney is toward the defense or prosecution? Christine A. Carneyy 0.2 All County Judges 0.9 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 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Q7. Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Carney's sentences? Christine A. Carney 0.3 All County Judges 0.5 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 Christine A. Carney AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Retention Recommendation 110000%% 95% 93% 90% 80% 77%77% 7744%% 7733%% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 13%13% 12%12% 10% 6% 6%6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 22%% 22%% 22%% 0% 0% 0% Including Undecided Excluding Undecided Judge Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 14 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Promptly making rulings during trial?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 77% 54% 57% B 12% 18% 18% C 3% 4% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 1% No Grade 8% 23% 21% Average 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 15 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 72% 58% 62% B 23% 28% 25% C 3% 9% 7% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 1% 2% Average 3.7 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 16 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Allotting appropriate amount of time for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 77% 58% 56% B 15% 29% 28% C 3% 7% 8% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 5% 4% 4% Average 3.8 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 17 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Keeping cases moving according to schedule?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 75% 58% 58% B 19% 30% 28% C 3% 6% 7% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 3% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 18 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "[Civil only] Assisting parties to reach agreement?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 11% 22% 23% B 25% 18% 17% C 11% 6% 8% D 2% 2% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 51% 51% 47% Average 2.9 3.1 3.0 Letter Grade B- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 19 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1f. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 67% 66% B 13% 22% 22% C 3% 6% 7% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 1% 2% Average 3.8 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 20 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1g. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 64% 42% 44% B 11% 19% 21% C 3% 6% 8% D 0% 2% 3% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 21% 30% 24% Average 3.8 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade A- B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 21 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1h. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 69% 47% 48% B 17% 15% 16% C 0% 4% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 14% 32% 29% Average 3.8 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 22 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1i. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 55% 54% B 12% 26% 26% C 2% 6% 8% D 0% 2% 3% Fail 0% 1% 2% No Grade 5% 9% 8% Average 3.8 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 23 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Basing decisions on evidence and arguments?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 53% 54% B 13% 25% 25% C 2% 9% 9% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 0% 5% 5% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 10 ## Page 24 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 80% 55% 56% B 11% 25% 25% C 7% 9% 9% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 0% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade A- B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 11 ## Page 25 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "[Civil only] Issuing written findings of fact and law?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 39% 20% 27% B 14% 12% 16% C 0% 4% 6% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 47% 60% 47% Average 3.7 3.1 3.2 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 12 ## Page 26 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Willing to reconsider error in fact or law?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 37% 26% 27% B 20% 17% 18% C 2% 9% 9% D 0% 5% 5% Fail 2% 4% 4% No Grade 40% 40% 38% Average 3.5 2.9 2.9 Letter Grade B+ B- B- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 13 ## Page 27 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having knowledge of relevant substantive law?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 74% 51% 54% B 21% 29% 28% C 3% 8% 9% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 14 ## Page 28 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having knowledge of rules of procedure and evidence?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 85% 57% 60% B 11% 25% 24% C 3% 8% 8% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 0% 4% 4% Average 3.8 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 15 ## Page 29 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 75% 58% 58% B 18% 25% 24% C 7% 8% 8% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 0% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 16 ## Page 30 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2h. How would you grade Judge Carney on "[Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 53% 44% 36% B 15% 20% 18% C 2% 6% 5% D 0% 3% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 30% 26% 37% Average 3.7 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade A- B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 17 ## Page 31 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2i. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible criticism?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 65% 55% 54% B 20% 20% 20% C 3% 7% 7% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 12% 12% 14% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 18 ## Page 32 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2j. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making decisions without fear of being appealed?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 74% 54% 55% B 15% 21% 20% C 0% 5% 6% D 0% 3% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 11% 16% 16% Average 3.8 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 19 ## Page 33 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Speaking clearly?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 88% 78% 76% B 10% 18% 18% C 0% 3% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 0% No Grade 2% 0% 1% Average 3.9 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 20 ## Page 34 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making sure all participants understand the proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 71% 71% B 15% 22% 21% C 2% 4% 5% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 1% 2% Average 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 21 ## Page 35 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Using understandable language?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 90% 77% 76% B 8% 19% 19% C 0% 3% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 0% No Grade 2% 0% 1% Average 3.9 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 22 ## Page 36 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 87% 69% 69% B 8% 20% 20% C 2% 6% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 0% 1% Average 3.8 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 23 ## Page 37 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating everyone involved politely?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 88% 69% 69% B 5% 17% 17% C 2% 6% 7% D 0% 4% 3% Fail 3% 4% 4% No Grade 2% 0% 1% Average 3.8 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 24 ## Page 38 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having empathy with the parties involved?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 75% 56% 55% B 13% 22% 22% C 5% 10% 10% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 3% 4% 4% No Grade 3% 3% 4% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 25 ## Page 39 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating participants with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 90% 68% 68% B 3% 19% 18% C 2% 6% 7% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 2% 3% 3% No Grade 2% 0% 1% Average 3.8 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 26 ## Page 40 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Presenting a neutral presence on the bench?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 83% 62% 64% B 12% 21% 20% C 2% 8% 8% D 0% 5% 4% Fail 2% 3% 4% No Grade 2% 1% 1% Average 3.8 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade A- B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 27 ## Page 41 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4f. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being consistent in [his/her] behavior?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 85% 64% 64% B 8% 22% 21% C 0% 6% 7% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 5% 3% 4% Average 3.9 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 28 ## Page 42 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4g. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Conducting [his/her] courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 88% 63% 64% B 7% 21% 20% C 2% 7% 7% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% 3% No Grade 2% 1% 2% Average 3.8 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 29 ## Page 43 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4h. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving all participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 90% 70% 70% B 5% 20% 19% C 2% 6% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 2% No Grade 2% 1% 1% Average 3.9 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 30 ## Page 44 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4i. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Consistently applying laws and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 87% 60% 59% B 7% 20% 21% C 0% 8% 8% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 5% 6% 6% Average 3.9 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 31 ## Page 45 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4j. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Not engaging in ex parte communications?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 78% 60% 64% B 8% 14% 12% C 0% 4% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 13% 20% 19% Average 3.9 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade A- B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 32 ## Page 46 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4k. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating pro se parties fairly?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 80% 55% 51% B 3% 14% 11% C 0% 4% 3% D 0% 2% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 17% 24% 33% Average 4.0 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 33 ## Page 47 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making tough decisions when necessary?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 70% 51% 53% B 20% 23% 22% C 0% 7% 7% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 10% 15% 13% Average 3.8 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 34 ## Page 48 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Using good judgment in application of relevant law and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 80% 54% 54% B 13% 25% 26% C 2% 9% 9% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 3% 5% 4% Average 3.8 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 35 ## Page 49 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Doing the necessary 'homework' and being prepared for [his/her] cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 52% 56% B 13% 23% 24% C 2% 8% 8% D 0% 3% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 3% 12% 9% Average 3.8 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 36 ## Page 50 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time consuming?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 75% 51% 54% B 5% 17% 18% C 0% 6% 6% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 20% 21% 19% Average 3.9 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 37 ## Page 51 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Providing prompt access to the court in emergency matters?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 55% 38% 39% B 12% 14% 14% C 2% 4% 4% D 0% 2% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 32% 41% 40% Average 3.8 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 38 ## Page 52 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Carney is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 0% 4% 3% ⇑ 4 0% 5% 4% 3 0% 7% 7% 2 11% 11% 10% 1 8% 15% 14% 0 Neutral 73% 53% 53% -1 8% 3% 4% -2 0% 1% 2% -3 0% 1% 2% -4 0% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 0% 0% 0% Average 0.2 0.9 0.7 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 39 ## Page 53 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Carney are? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 0% 2% 2% ⇑ 4 0% 3% 3% 3 3% 5% 4% 2 8% 8% 8% 1 5% 11% 10% 0 Appropriate 82% 63% 60% -1 3% 4% 4% -2 0% 2% 3% -3 0% 2% 3% -4 0% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 0% 0% 1% Average 0.3 0.5 0.3 hsraH oT thgiL oT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 40 ## Page 54 Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 Strongly Recommend 95% 77% 77% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 3% 13% 13% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 0% 5% 4% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 2% 6% 6% Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 41 ## Page 55 NNoonn--AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 110033)) ## Page 56 Christine A. Carney NNoonn-AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Overall and by Section 3.5 Overall Average 3.5 3.6 3.6 QQ11. OOvveerraallll DDeemmeeaannoorr 33.55 3.6 3.6 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.5 3.6 3.6 Q3. Overall 3.6 Communications 3.7 3.5 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.5 3.6 3.4 Q5. Overall Application of 3.4 Law 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 AAverage GGradde Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 57 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Demeanor 3.6 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.5 3.6 33.77 1a. Giving court proceedings a 3.5 sense of dignity 3.6 3.7 1b. Treating participants politely 3.5 and with respect 3.6 3.6 1c. Conducting [his/her] 3.5 courtroom in a neutral manner 3.6 3.5 1d. Having a sense of compassion and human 3.4 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 Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 58 Christine A. Carney NNoonn-AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Fairness 3.6 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.5 3.6 3.6 2a. Giving participants an 3.5 opportunity to be heard 3.6 3.5 2b. Treating those involved with 3.5 the case without bias 3.5 3.7 2c. Treating fairly people who 3.4 represent themselves 3.5 3.6 2d. Giving each side enough 3.5 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 Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 59 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Communications 3.6 Q3. Overall Communications 3.6 3.7 3.5 3a. Making sure all participants understand the 3.6 proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom 3.6 3.5 3b. Using language that 3.6 everyone can understand 3.7 3.7 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 Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 60 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Diligence 3.5 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.5 3.6 3.4 44a. BBegiinniing courtt on ttiime 33.44 3.4 3.7 4b. Maintaining appropriate 33..66 conttroll over proceeddiings 3.7 3.5 4c. Setting reasonable 3.5 sscchheedduulleess ffoorr ccaasseess 3.6 3.6 4d. Being prepared for [his/her] 3.6 cases 3.6 3.5 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 Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 61 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.4 Q5. Overall App of Law 3.4 3.5 3.4 5a. Giving reasons for rulings 3.4 3.5 3.6 5b. Willing to make decision without regard to possible 3.5 outside pressure 3.5 3.4 5c. Being able to identify and 3.4 analyze relevant facts 33.55 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 62 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey Average: How biased do you think Judge Carney is toward the defense or prosecution? Christine A. Carney 0.0 All County 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 63 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Carney's sentences? Christine A. Carneyy -0.2 All County 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 64 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 100% 90% 85% 85% 81% 80% 78% 78% 74% 70% 60% 5500%% 40% 30% 20% 9% 9%9% 10% 8% 8% 8%8% 8% 7% 7% 6% 5% 5% 5% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% Including Undecided Excluding Undecided Judge Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 65 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 74% 69% 73% B 18% 19% 18% C 6% 6% 4% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 2% 1% Average 3.7 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 66 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating participants politely and with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 73% 72% 76% B 19% 16% 14% C 4% 5% 4% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 1% 4% 3% No Grade 2% 1% 1% Average 3.7 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 67 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Conducting [his/her] courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 69% 70% 74% B 22% 16% 14% C 3% 5% 5% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 0% 4% 3% No Grade 3% 2% 1% Average 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 68 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having a sense of compassion and human understanding for those who appear before the judge?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 64% 65% 69% B 20% 18% 17% C 4% 6% 5% D 6% 3% 2% Fail 1% 5% 4% No Grade 6% 3% 3% Average 3.5 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 69 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 73% 72% 75% B 18% 15% 14% C 4% 5% 4% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 2% 4% 3% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 70 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating those involved in the case without bias?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 72% 70% 73% B 15% 15% 14% C 6% 4% 4% D 1% 3% 2% Fail 4% 5% 4% No Grade 3% 3% 3% Average 3.5 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 71 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating fairly people who represent themselves?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 64% 52% 49% B 9% 11% 9% C 1% 4% 3% D 0% 2% 1% Fail 3% 4% 3% No Grade 24% 27% 35% Average 3.7 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 72 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving each side enough time to present his or her case?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 72% 69% 72% B 16% 15% 14% C 1% 5% 4% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 5% 3% 3% No Grade 6% 6% 5% Average 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 73 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making sure participants understand the proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 69% 74% 76% B 21% 14% 14% C 4% 6% 5% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 5% 2% 2% No Grade 1% 2% 2% Average 3.5 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 74 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Using language that everyone can understand?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 67% 74% 76% B 23% 17% 16% C 8% 5% 4% D 1% 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% 1% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.5 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade B+ B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 10 ## Page 75 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear what's being said?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 77% 76% 78% B 17% 15% 14% C 4% 5% 4% D 1% 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% 1% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.7 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 11 ## Page 76 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 56% 59% 61% B 29% 23% 24% C 6% 9% 8% D 2% 3% 2% Fail 3% 3% 2% No Grade 4% 4% 4% Average 3.4 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 12 ## Page 77 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 75% 75% 77% B 17% 16% 15% C 3% 5% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 3% 1% 1% No Grade 3% 2% 2% Average 3.7 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade A- B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 13 ## Page 78 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 56% 59% 62% B 17% 17% 17% C 3% 6% 5% D 2% 1% 1% Fail 4% 2% 2% No Grade 17% 15% 13% Average 3.5 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 14 ## Page 79 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being prepared for [his/her] cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 67% 67% 71% B 17% 15% 14% C 4% 5% 4% D 2% 2% 1% Fail 2% 3% 2% No Grade 9% 9% 8% Average 3.6 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 15 ## Page 80 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted time?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 65% 64% 66% B 24% 20% 20% C 5% 7% 7% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% 2% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.5 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 16 ## Page 81 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 59% 62% 65% B 20% 16% 16% C 7% 7% 5% D 1% 3% 2% Fail 5% 4% 3% No Grade 8% 9% 9% Average 3.4 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 17 ## Page 82 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible outside pressure?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 57% 57% 59% B 21% 12% 12% C 0% 4% 4% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 2% 4% 3% No Grade 17% 21% 20% Average 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 18 ## Page 83 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 67% 64% 66% B 18% 14% 14% C 4% 5% 4% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 5% 4% 4% No Grade 4% 10% 10% Average 3.4 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 19 ## Page 84 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Carney is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 1% 2% 2% ⇑ 4 0% 2% 1% 3 4% 2% 2% 2 3% 2% 2% 1 3% 5% 5% 0 Neutral 72% 78% 82% -1 9% 3% 3% -2 4% 1% 1% -3 0% 1% 1% -4 1% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 1% 1% 1% Average 0.0 0.1 0.1 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 20 ## Page 85 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Carney are? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 2% 3% 2% ⇑ 4 3% 2% 2% 3 2% 2% 2% 2 2% 3% 2% 1 3% 3% 3% 0 Appropriate 64% 73% 76% -1 8% 5% 5% -2 10% 3% 4% -3 2% 2% 2% -4 2% 2% 1% ⇓ -5 2% 2% 1% Average -0.2 0.0 0.0 hsraH oT thgiL oT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 21 ## Page 86 Christine A. Carney Non-Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2006 Judges 2008 Strongly Recommend 85% 81% 85% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 9% 9% 8% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 1% 3% 2% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 5% 7% 5% Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 22 ## Page 87 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy ## Page 88 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 89 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 90 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 91 Results: The results of the Survey are in two main sections: Attorney 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. 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 county 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 county 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 92 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 93 Christine A. Carney Responses by Type Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Coop Role Type Sent Response Not Applicable Responses Completes Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 7 2 1 0 4 66.7% Defense Attorneys 25 5 2 0 18 78.3% Other Attorneys Criminal 3 1 0 0 2 66.7% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 27 3 5 0 19 86.4% Other Attorneys Civil 2 0 0 0 2 100.0% Attorneys, Unknown Role Type 21 4 1 0 16 80.0% Total Attorneys 85 15 9 0 61 19.7% Non-attorneys Criminal Law Enforcement 149 87 32 0 30 25.6% Defendant 175 128 37 0 10 7.2% Witness 51 43 7 1 0 0.0% Other 43 25 10 0 8 24.2% Civil Litigant 132 93 23 0 16 14.7% Other 1 0 0 0 1 100.0% Non-attorneys, Unknown Role Type 102 48 46 0 8 14.3% Total Non-attorneys 653 424 155 1 73 85.1% Others Jurors 54 23 1 0 30 56.6% Total Others 54 23 1 0 30 43.4% Grand Total: 792 462 165 1 164 26.2% Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 94 QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirreess ## Page 95 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 96 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 97 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 98 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
• 2004 cycle
  • 2004 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
    Read full retention survey textexpandcollapse

    ## Page 1 State of Colorado Logo COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE 2004 Judicial Performance Survey TThhee HHoonnoorraabbllee CChhrriissttiinnee AA.. CCaarrnneeyy ## Page 2 March 22, 2004 The Honorable Christine A. Carney County Judge, 8th Judicial District Larimer County Justice Center 201 La Porte Ave., Suite 100 Ft. Collins, Co. 80521-2761 Dear Judge Carney: 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 2004 survey was conducted by Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc., who attempted to contact over 35,000 people who had been in these courtrooms in one capacity or another. Over 10,000 people responded—3,683 to the attorney survey and 6,330 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: · Attorney Results & Comments: This section contains graphs displaying the average grade you received overall (the combined average from questions 1a through 5e as required by the recent rule changes) , 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. · 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 The Honorable Christine A. Carney March 22, 2004 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 4 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Average Grades: Overall and by Section 3.7 Overall Average 3.4 3.3 3.6 Q1. Overall Case 3.4 Management 3.3 3.6 Q2. Overall App & 3.3 Knowldge of Law 3.2 3.8 Q3. Overall 3.6 Communications 3.5 3.7 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.4 3.4 3.6 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 5 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Average Grades: Case Management 3.6 Q1. Overall Case Management 3.4 3.3 3.8 1a. Promptly making rulings 3.5 during trial 3.5 3.6 1b. Beginning court on time 3.3 3.4 3.6 1c. Allotting appropriate 3.3 amount of time for cases 3.3 3.6 1d. Keeping cases moving 3.4 according to schedule 3.3 3.3 1e. Assisting parties to reach 3.1 agreement 3 3.7 1f. Maintaining appropriate 3.5 control over proceedings 3.4 3.6 1g. Promptly ruling on pre-trial 3.3 motions 3.2 3.8 1h. Promptly issuing a 3.5 decision on the case after trial 3.4 3.7 1i. Setting reasonable 3.4 schedules for cases 3.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 6 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.6 Q2. Overall App & Knowldge of 3.3 Law 3.2 3.5 2a. Basing decisions on 3.2 evidence and arguments 3.2 3.6 2b. Giving reasons for rulings 3.3 3.3 3.3 2c. Issuing written findings of 3 fact and law 3.1 3.5 2d. Willing to reconsider error 2.9 in fact or law 2.9 3.5 2e. Having knowledge of 3.2 relevant substantive law 3.2 3.6 2f. Having knowledge of rules 3.3 of procedure and evidence 3.3 3.7 2g. Being able to identify and 3.3 analyze relevant facts 3.3 2h. Issuing consistent 3.8 sentences when the 3.3 circumstances are similar 3.2 2i. Willing to make decision 3.7 without regard to possible 3.3 criticism 3.3 3.8 2j. Making decisions without 3.4 fear of being appealed 3.4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 7 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Average Grades: Communications 3.8 Q3. Overall Communications 3.6 3.6 3.8 3a. Speaking clearly 3.5 3.5 3.8 3b. Making sure all participants understand the 3.6 proceedings 3.6 3.4 3c. Using understandable 3.6 language 3.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 8 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Average Grades: Demeanor 3.7 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.4 3.4 3.7 4a. Giving proceedings a 3.5 sense of dignity 3.5 3.7 4b. Treating everyone 3.4 involved politely 3.4 3.6 4c. Having empathy with the 3.2 parties involved 3.2 3.7 4d. Treating participants with 3.4 respect 3.4 3.7 4e. Presenting a neutral 3.3 presence on the bench 3.3 3.7 4f. Being consistent in his/her 3.4 behavior 3.3 4g. Conducting his/her 3.7 courtroom in a neutral 3.3 manner 3.3 3.7 4h. Giving all participants an 3.5 opportunity to be heard 3.4 3.6 4i. Consistently applying laws 3.3 and rules 3.3 3.8 4j. Not engaging in ex parte 3.5 communications 3.6 3.7 4k. Treating pro se parties 3.4 fairly 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 9 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Average Grades: Diligence 3.6 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.2 3.7 5a. Making tough decisions 3.3 when necessary 3.3 3.6 5b. Using good judgment in application of relevant law and 3.2 rules 3.2 3.7 5c. Doing the necessary "homework" and being 3.3 prepared for his/her cases 3.2 5d. Being willing to handle 3.7 cases on the docket even when they are 3.4 complicatedand time consuming 3.3 3.6 5e. Providing prompt access to the court in emergency 3.4 matters 3.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney All County Judges Average Grade All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 10 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Q6. Average: How biased do you think Judge Carney is toward the defense or prosecution? Christine A. 0.3 Carney All County 0.8 Judges All Trial Judges 0.7 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 ç Defense Prosecution è Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 11 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Q7. Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Carney's sentences? Christine A. 0.1 Carney All County 0.5 Judges All Trial Judges 0.4 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 ç Lenient Harsh è Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 12 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 100% 93% 89% 90% 80% 74% 73% 70% 69% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 17% 16% 16% 15% 10% 6%6% 6%6% 5%5% 5% 5% 4%4% 4% 4%4% 2% 2% 0% Str o n gl y n ot r et ai n m e w h at n ot r et ai n U n d e ci d e d S o m e w h at r et ai n Str o n gl y r et ai n Str o n gl y n ot r et ai n m e w h at n ot r et ai n S o m e w h at r et ai n Str o n gl y r et ai n o o S S Judge Carney Including Undecided Excluding Undecided All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 13 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Promptly making rulings during trial?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 51% 51% B 15% 22% 24% C 3% 6% 6% D 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 7% 19% 17% Average 3.8 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 14 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 68% 53% 54% B 27% 30% 29% C 2% 10% 9% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 3% 4% Average 3.6 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 15 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Allotting appropriate amount of time for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 62% 50% 49% B 32% 31% 30% C 2% 9% 10% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 3% 6% 6% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 16 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Keeping cases moving according to schedule?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 65% 52% 50% B 28% 31% 30% C 2% 9% 10% D 2% 3% 4% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 3% 5% 5% Average 3.6 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 17 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Assisting parties to reach agreement?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 28% 21% 25% B 29% 16% 18% C 5% 8% 10% D 3% 4% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 36% 51% 41% Average 3.3 3.1 3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 18 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1f. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 59% 58% B 19% 27% 27% C 3% 8% 8% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 2% 4% 3% Average 3.7 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 19 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1g. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 50% 41% 39% B 17% 21% 24% C 3% 8% 10% D 2% 3% 4% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 28% 27% 21% Average 3.6 3.3 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 20 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1h. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 47% 44% B 18% 20% 21% C 2% 6% 7% D 1% 2% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 5% 25% 24% Average 3.8 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 21 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 1i. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 72% 50% 47% B 25% 29% 30% C 9% 10% D 2% 2% 3% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 2% 9% 8% Average 3.7 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade A- B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 22 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Basing decisions on evidence and arguments?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 61% 49% 49% B 27% 27% 27% C 5% 11% 10% D 3% 5% 5% Fail 2% 3% No Grade 3% 6% 6% Average 3.5 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 10 ## Page 23 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 67% 51% 51% B 22% 27% 27% C 7% 10% 10% D 2% 4% 5% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 3% 6% 5% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 11 ## Page 24 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Issuing written findings of fact and law?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 39% 19% 27% B 18% 11% 17% C 9% 8% 9% D 4% 3% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 32% 57% 42% Average 3.3 3 3.1 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 12 ## Page 25 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Willing to reconsider error in fact or law?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 32% 27% 26% B 18% 19% 20% C 5% 11% 11% D 5% 5% Fail 3% 4% No Grade 45% 35% 34% Average 3.5 2.9 2.9 Letter Grade B+ B- B- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 13 ## Page 26 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having knowledge of relevant substantive law?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 47% 46% B 27% 30% 31% C 3% 11% 11% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 7% 6% 5% Average 3.5 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 14 ## Page 27 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having knowledge of rules of procedure and evidence?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 65% 52% 52% B 28% 28% 29% C 2% 9% 9% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 3% 5% 5% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 15 ## Page 28 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 72% 51% 51% B 20% 28% 28% C 9% 10% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 5% 6% 5% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 16 ## Page 29 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2h. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 33% 38% 27% B 11% 23% 17% C 7% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 56% 28% 46% Average 3.8 3.3 3.2 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 17 ## Page 30 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2i. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible criticism?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 47% 47% B 20% 23% 23% C 2% 9% 8% D 3% 3% Fail 3% 2% No Grade 18% 15% 17% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 18 ## Page 31 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 2j. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making decisions without fear of being appealed?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 49% 48% B 18% 23% 22% C 7% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 22% 17% 18% Average 3.8 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 19 ## Page 32 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Speaking clearly?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 82% 70% 67% B 16% 21% 23% C 2% 6% 6% D 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% No Grade 2% 2% Average 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 20 ## Page 33 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making sure all participants understand the proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 79% 66% 64% B 13% 21% 23% C 2% 7% 7% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 5% 3% 3% Average 3.8 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 21 ## Page 34 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Using understandable language?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 84% 69% 67% B 15% 21% 24% C 6% 6% D 2% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% No Grade 2% 2% Average 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 22 ## Page 35 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 74% 64% 63% B 23% 24% 23% C 7% 7% D 2% 2% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 23 ## Page 36 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating everyone involved politely?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 74% 61% 63% B 21% 20% 20% C 9% 8% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% 4% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 24 ## Page 37 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having empathy with the parties involved?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 64% 51% 51% B 23% 24% 24% C 3% 11% 11% D 3% 5% 5% Fail 4% 3% No Grade 7% 5% 6% Average 3.6 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 25 ## Page 38 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating participants with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 72% 62% 62% B 21% 21% 21% C 3% 8% 8% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 26 ## Page 39 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Presenting a neutral presence on the bench?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 57% 58% B 18% 23% 23% C 2% 9% 9% D 3% 5% 4% Fail 4% 3% No Grade 2% 2% 3% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 27 ## Page 40 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4f. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being consistent in his/her behavior?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 58% 58% B 15% 22% 23% C 2% 9% 9% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 5% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade A- B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 28 ## Page 41 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4g. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 57% 59% B 16% 23% 23% C 3% 9% 9% D 3% 5% 4% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 2% 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 29 ## Page 42 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4h. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving all participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 61% 62% B 20% 24% 23% C 2% 8% 7% D 2% 2% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 2% 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 30 ## Page 43 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4i. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Consistently applying laws and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 67% 54% 53% B 23% 24% 24% C 3% 10% 10% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% No Grade 5% 6% 6% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 31 ## Page 44 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4j. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Not engaging in ex parte communications?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 62% 55% 56% B 18% 19% 17% C 4% 4% D 2% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 20% 20% 20% Average 3.8 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 32 ## Page 45 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 4k. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating pro se parties fairly?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 58% 51% 45% B 14% 18% 15% C 3% 5% 4% D 2% 2% 1% Fail 3% 2% No Grade 24% 22% 33% Average 3.7 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 33 ## Page 46 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making tough decisions when necessary?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 45% 47% B 20% 26% 25% C 3% 9% 10% D 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 18% 15% 14% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 34 ## Page 47 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Using good judgment in application of relevant law and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 65% 48% 48% B 22% 28% 28% C 7% 11% 11% D 2% 5% 5% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 5% 6% 5% Average 3.6 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 35 ## Page 48 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Doing the necessary "homework" and being prepared for his/her cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 67% 47% 47% B 20% 27% 27% C 3% 10% 11% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% No Grade 8% 11% 9% Average 3.7 3.3 3.2 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 36 ## Page 49 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicatedand time consuming?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 62% 48% 47% B 16% 22% 22% C 2% 8% 8% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 18% 17% 17% Average 3.7 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade A- B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 37 ## Page 50 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Providing prompt access to the court in emergency matters?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 47% 38% 37% B 13% 16% 16% C 3% 5% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 35% 37% 37% Average 3.6 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 38 ## Page 51 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Carney is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 4% 3% 4 3% 3% 3 4% 6% 6% 2 7% 13% 12% 1 7% 18% 16% 79% 49% 49% -1 4% 4% 4% -2 2% 2% -3 1% 1% -4 1% 1% -5 0% 1% Average 0.3 0.8 0.7 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Ý 0 Neutral ß Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 39 ## Page 52 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Carney are? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 3% 2% 4 3% 2% 3 5% 5% 2 4% 9% 9% 1 13% 13% 12% 75% 59% 58% -1 8% 4% 5% -2 2% 2% -3 2% 2% -4 0% 1% -5 0% 1% Average 0.1 0.5 0.4 hsraH thgiL Ý 0 Appropriate ß Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 40 ## Page 53 Judge Christine A. Carney Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 Strongly Recommend 93% 73% 74% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 5% 17% 16% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 2% 4% 4% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 6% 6% Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 41 ## Page 54 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Overall and by Section 3.6 Overall Average 3.3 3.3 3.6 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.3 3.3 3.7 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.3 3.3 3.7 Q3. Overall 3.5 Communications 3.5 3.6 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.3 3.6 Q5. Overall Application 3.2 of Law 3.2 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 55 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Demeanor 3.6 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.2 3.3 3.6 1a. Giving proceedings a 3.3 sense of dignity 3.4 3.7 1b. Treating participants 3.3 politely and with respect 3.4 3.5 1c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral 3.2 manner 3.3 3.5 1d. Having a sense of compassion and human 3.1 understanding 3.2 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 56 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Fairness 3.7 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.3 3.3 3.7 2a. Giving participants an 3.3 opportunity to be heard 3.4 3.6 2b. Treating those involved 3.2 with the case without bias 3.2 3.7 2c. Treating fairly people who 3.2 represent themselves 3.3 3.6 2d. Giving each side enough time to present his or her 3.3 case 3.4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Christine A. Carney All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 57 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Communications 3.7 Q3. Overall Communications 3.4 3.5 3.6 3a. Making sure all participants understand the 3.4 proceedings 3.4 3.7 3b. Using language that 3.4 everyone can understand 3.5 3.7 3c. Speaking clearly so 3.5 everyone can hear 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 58 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Diligence 3.6 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.3 3.6 4a. Beginning court on time 3.2 3.2 3.7 4b. Maintaining appropriate 3.5 control over proceedings 3.5 3.7 4c. Setting reasonable 3.3 schedules for cases 3.3 3.6 4d. Being prepared for his or 3.3 her cases 3.4 3.6 4e. Managing court proceedings so that there is 3.3 little wasted time 3.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney All County Judges Average Grade All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 59 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.6 Q5. Overall App of Law 3.2 3.2 3.6 5a. Giving reasons for rulings 3.2 3.2 3.7 5b. Willing to make decision without regard to possible 3.2 outside pressure 3.2 3.7 5c. Being able to identify and 3.2 analyze relevant facts 3.2 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Christine A. Carney Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 60 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Q6. Average: How biased do you think Judge Carney is toward the defense or prosecution? Christine A. 0.1 Carney All County 0.2 Judges All Trial Judges 0.1 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 ç Defense Prosecution è Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 61 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Q7. Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Carney's sentences? Christine A. -0.1 Carney All County 0 Judges All Trial Judges -0.1 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 ç Lenient Harsh è Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 62 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 100% 89% 90% 84% 80% 74% 72% 70% 67% 65% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 11%11% 11%11% 10%10% 10% 10%10% 9% 10% 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 4% 3% 3% 1% 1% 0% Str o n gl y n ot r et ai n m e w h at n ot r et ai n U n d e ci d e d S o m e w h at r et ai n Str o n gl y r et ai n Str o n gl y n ot r et ai n m e w h at n ot r et ai n S o m e w h at r et ai n Str o n gl y r et ai n o o S S Judge Carney Including Undecided Excluding Undecided All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 63 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 63% 58% 60% B 27% 23% 23% C 2% 9% 8% D 2% 4% 3% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 6% 3% 3% Average 3.6 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 64 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating participants politely and with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 69% 61% 63% B 19% 19% 19% C 3% 9% 8% D 2% 5% 4% Fail 4% 4% No Grade 6% 3% 2% Average 3.7 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade A- B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 65 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 63% 59% 61% B 23% 19% 18% C 4% 9% 8% D 5% 4% Fail 3% 5% 5% No Grade 6% 3% 3% Average 3.5 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 66 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Having a sense of compassion and human understanding for those who appear before the judge?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 54% 54% 56% B 28% 20% 20% C 6% 10% 9% D 5% 4% Fail 2% 7% 6% No Grade 9% 4% 4% Average 3.5 3.1 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 67 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 72% 60% 62% B 14% 21% 20% C 2% 7% 7% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 5% 4% No Grade 8% 4% 3% Average 3.7 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade A- B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 68 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating those involved in the case without bias?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 72% 58% 60% B 12% 19% 18% C 3% 7% 7% D 1% 5% 4% Fail 3% 7% 7% No Grade 8% 4% 4% Average 3.6 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 69 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Treating fairly people who represent themselves?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 57% 47% 45% B 9% 15% 14% C 1% 6% 5% D 4% 3% Fail 2% 6% 5% No Grade 31% 23% 29% Average 3.7 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 70 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving each side enough time to present his or her case?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 64% 57% 59% B 21% 20% 19% C 1% 8% 7% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 1% 4% 4% No Grade 11% 8% 7% Average 3.6 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 71 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Making sure all participants understand the proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 66% 63% 64% B 18% 20% 19% C 3% 8% 8% D 3% 4% 3% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 9% 3% 3% Average 3.6 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 72 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Using language that everyone can understand?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 72% 63% 64% B 14% 21% 21% C 3% 8% 8% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 8% 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 10 ## Page 73 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear what's being said?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 70% 66% 66% B 19% 20% 20% C 2% 7% 7% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 7% 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 11 ## Page 74 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 50% 52% B 19% 25% 25% C 8% 11% 10% D 4% 4% Fail 5% 4% No Grade 12% 5% 5% Average 3.6 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 12 ## Page 75 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 70% 63% 64% B 18% 22% 21% C 3% 7% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 8% 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 13 ## Page 76 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 51% 48% 51% B 12% 23% 21% C 2% 8% 8% D 1% 3% 3% Fail 1% 3% 3% No Grade 34% 15% 14% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 14 ## Page 77 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being prepared for his or her cases?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 61% 56% 58% B 15% 21% 19% C 5% 8% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 1% 3% 4% No Grade 18% 9% 9% Average 3.6 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 15 ## Page 78 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted time?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 64% 53% 54% B 24% 25% 24% C 4% 10% 10% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 4% 4% No Grade 6% 5% 5% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 16 ## Page 79 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 52% 54% B 20% 20% 20% C 4% 9% 8% D 4% 4% Fail 2% 6% 5% No Grade 15% 9% 9% Average 3.6 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 17 ## Page 80 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible outside pressure?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 48% 50% B 10% 17% 16% C 3% 7% 7% D 4% 3% Fail 2% 6% 6% No Grade 25% 18% 18% Average 3.7 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 18 ## Page 81 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Carney on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 70% 53% 55% B 9% 19% 18% C 4% 8% 7% D 1% 4% 4% Fail 2% 6% 6% No Grade 14% 9% 9% Average 3.7 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 19 ## Page 82 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Carney is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 4% 3% 4 3% 2% 3 1% 2% 2% 2 3% 3% 3% 1 6% 6% 6% 85% 68% 70% -1 4% 4% 4% -2 3% 3% -3 3% 2% -4 1% 2% -5 2% 2% Average 0.1 0.2 0.1 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Ý 0 Neutral ß Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 20 ## Page 83 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Carney are? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 5% 4% 4 3% 2% 3 2% 3% 3% 2 2% 3% 3% 1 5% 4% 4% 78% 60% 62% -1 5% 6% 7% -2 2% 6% 6% -3 4% 5% 5% -4 2% 2% -5 2% 3% 2% Average -0.1 0.0 -0.1 hsraH thgiL Ý 0 Appropriate ß Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 21 ## Page 84 Judge Christine A. Carney Non Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Carney be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Carney Judges 2004 Judges 2004 Strongly Recommend 89% 72% 74% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 7% 11% 11% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 1% 6% 5% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 3% 11% 11% Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 22 ## Page 85 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy Sample: The Colorado Judicial Department provided Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc. with all the names and addresses of people from its ICON data base who in the previous 12 months had likely been in each judge’s courtroom who was up for retention in November 2004. These names and addresses where then supplemented from the Colorado District Attorney’s database (Blackstone system) and the databases of jurors, court employees and sheriff’s security. The data was then combined and cleaned. Where there were more than 400 potential respondents, a random sample was 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 been in. Survey: Starting in November 2004, each person in the sample database was mailed 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, and in some cases reminder postcards. During this process, the sample was augmented for judges with a particularly low number of completed questionnaires. Questionnaire: The questionnaire used in the 2004 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 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 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. 1 ## Page 86 Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Attorney Respondents Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate District Attorney 719 394 7 69 9 60.6% Attorney For Defendant 2,219 1,040 17 218 24 52.0% Guardian ad Litem 131 79 0 10 1 65.3% Unknown Attorney Type 5,378 2,170 56 751 88 46.9% Attorney Total 8,447 3,683 80 1,048 122 49.8% Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Non-Attny Respondents Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate Law Enforcement 3,111 916 55 672 3 37.6% Employee 1,739 976 18 224 0 64.4% Defendant 12,171 1,620 148 2,439 27 16.6% Plaintiff 3,617 881 66 500 11 28.3% Juror 4,488 1,632 117 511 15 41.0% Victim 552 83 11 101 2 18.4% Other 1,650 222 25 373 8 17.4% Non-attorney Total 27,328 6,330 440 4,820 66 28.1% Total 35,775 10,013 520 5,868 188 33.5% A similar table showing the response count and cooperation rate for your survey is provided at the end of this methodology section. Results: The results of the Survey are in two main sections: Attorney Respondents and Non-attorney Respondents. Within each main section are three subsections: graphs displaying average grades for each section and question, the percentage distribution of grades, and respondent comments. 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 or county judges, and all trial judges for which 2004 surveys were conducted. Questions relating to bias toward the defense or prosecution, sentencing and retention recommendation are also graphed. 2 ## Page 87 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— = 3.68 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 2004, along with a second comparative column showing the results for all trial judges in the 2004 survey. Comments: Each respondent was encouraged to comment on the judge’s performance. This section contains those comments. 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 88 Judge Christine A. Carney Responses by Type Total Other Non- Coop Role Type Sent Completes Refusals Undeliverable Responses Rate District Attorney 6 4 0 1 0 80.0% Attorney For Defendant 32 16 0 2 0 53.3% Guardian ad Litem Unknown Attorney Type 100 41 2 23 2 53.2% Sub Total: 138 61 2 26 2 54.5% Defendant 172 9 1 38 0 6.7% Plaintiff 48 9 2 4 0 20.5% Law Enforcement 70 27 2 17 0 50.9% Employee 30 22 0 5 0 88.0% Juror 60 21 4 4 0 37.5% Victim 26 4 1 4 0 18.2% Other 45 6 0 16 0 20.7% Sub Total: 451 98 10 88 0 27.0% Grand Total: 589 159 12 114 2 33.5% Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 89 Commission on Judicial Performance 2003 Judicial Performance Attorney Questionnaire Evaluation of JUDGE _ 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 do 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/NA). DK/ 1. Case Management: A B C D F NA a. Promptly making rulings during trial. 4 3 2 1 0 9 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 d. Keeping cases moving according to schedule. 4 3 2 1 0 9 e. [Civil only]1 Assisting parties to reach agreement. 4 3 2 1 0 9 f. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 g. Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions. 4 3 2 1 0 9 h. Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial. 4 3 2 1 0 9 i. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 2. Application and Knowledge of Law: 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 f. Having knowledge of rules of procedure and evidence. 4 3 2 1 0 9 g. Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts. 4 3 2 1 0 9 h. [Criminal only]2 Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar. 4 3 2 1 0 9 i. Willing to make decision 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 3. Communications: a. Speaking clearly. 4 3 2 1 0 9 b. Makings sure all participants understand the proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Using understandable language. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. [District only] Providing written communications that are clear, thorough and well reasoned. 4 3 2 1 0 9 4. Demeanor: a. Giving proceedings a sense of dignity. 4 3 2 1 0 9 b. Treating everyone involved politely. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Having empathy with the parties involved. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. Treating participants with respect. 4 3 2 1 0 9 e. Presenting a neutral presence on the bench. 4 3 2 1 0 9 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 h. Giving all participants an opportunity to be heard. 4 3 2 1 0 9 i. Consistently applying laws and rules. 4 3 2 1 0 9 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 5. Diligence: 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 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] 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 90 6. [Criminal cases only] 1 On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate number how biased you think Judge _ is toward the defense or the prosecution. If you feel Judge _ 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. [Criminal cases only]1 On the scale below, please indicate by circling the appropriate number how lenient or how harsh you think the sentences generally handed down by Judge _ are. If you feel Judge _ 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 8. If an associate were assigned to Judge _ in a case and asked you for advice, what would you say? _ _ _ _ 9. What would you say are Judge _’s strengths? _ _ _ _ 10. And what would you say are Judge _’s weaknesses? _ _ _ _ 11. Is there anything else that you would like to say about Judge _ ? _ _ _ 12. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how strongly do you recommend that Judge _ be retained in office, or not retained in office? Strongly recommend he be retained in office. 5 Somewhat recommend he be retained in office. 4 Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation. 3 Somewhat recommend he not be retained in office. 2 Strongly recommend he not be retained in office. 1 And why do you think that way about retaining or not retaining Judge _ ? _ _ _ _ Thank you for your time in completing this questionnaire. Please place it in the self-addressed, postage paid enveloped provided, and place it in the mail. Your participation in this survey is very much appreciated. 1 Please answer questions 6 & 7 only if you have observed the judge in a criminal case. ## Page 91 Commission on Judicial Performance 2003 Judicial Performance Questionnaire Evaluation of JUDGE _ 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 do 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/NA). DK/ 1. Demeanor: A B C D F NA 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 understanding for those who appear before him/her. 4 3 2 1 0 9 2. Fairness: 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 3. Communications: 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 4. Diligence: a. Beginning court on time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 b. Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 c. Setting reasonable schedules for cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 d. Being prepared for his/her cases. 4 3 2 1 0 9 e. Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted time. 4 3 2 1 0 9 5. Application of Law: a. Giving reasons for rulings. 4 3 2 1 0 9 b. Willing to make decision without regard to 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 Judge _’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 _ is toward the defense or the prosecution. If you feel Judge _ is completely unbiased, circle “0.” Bias toward Completely Bias toward Defense Neutral Prosecution 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Continued on Other Side ## Page 92 7. [If you were in Judge _ ’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 lenient or how harsh you think the sentences generally handed down by Judge _ are. If you feel Judge _ 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 8. If a friend of yours was scheduled to appear before Judge _ as a party in either a civil or criminal case and asked you for advice, what would you tell your friend about Judge _ ? _ _ _ _ 9. What would you say are Judge _’s strengths? _ _ _ _ 10. And what would you say are Judge _’s weaknesses? _ _ _ _ 11. Is there anything else that you would like to say about Judge _? _ _ _ _ 12. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how strongly do you recommend that Judge _ be retained in office, or not retained in office? Strongly recommend he be retained in office. 5 Somewhat recommend he be retained in office. 4 Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation. 3 Somewhat recommend he not be retained in office. 2 Strongly recommend he not be retained in office. 1 And why do you think that way about retaining or not retaining Judge _? _ _ _ _ Thank you for your time in completing this questionnaire. Please place it in the self-addressed, postage paid enveloped provided, and place it in the mail. Your participation in this survey is very much appreciated.

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

• 2012 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 2008 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 2004 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 2000 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026