← All judges

T. Peter Craven

Trial Court · Garfield · Garfield

Meets Standards(Retain)2 cycles on record

Evaluation history

  • 2000 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Garfield · Garfield
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    VotersRetained· 78.1% yes
    16,828 yes · 4,731 no50% needed to retain
    Retention Year: 2000 Recommendation: Retain The Ninth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge T. Peter Craven BE RETAINED. Judge T. Peter Craven was appointed to the bench in January 1991. He had been an attorney for 25 years prior to that specializing in trial and municipal law. The Commission found Judge Craven thoughtful and intelligent and was especially impressed by his self-evaluation in which he showed an awareness of both his strengths and weaknesses. His self-evaluation was consistent with the performance survey sent out. He is aware of changes in the community and how they are impacting the court system. Having identified them, he has made it a priority to educate himself on how to deal with these changes. Judge Craven is considered to be fair and consistent in his rulings. Percentage rates for retention of Judge Craven from respondents returning a judicial performance survey are: Attorneys - 70%; Court Personnel - 86%; Jurors -100%; Litigants - 56%; Law Enforcement Personnel - 77%; Social Services Personnel - 71%; Other respondents - 71%. There were 143 respondents to the survey. Of the 106 respondents who were not attorneys, 76% favored retention, 11% favored non-retention and 12% had no opinion. Of the 37 respondents who were attorneys, 70% favored retention, 22% favored non-retention and 8% had no opinion.
  • 1994 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Garfield · Garfield
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    Retention Year: 1994 Recommendation: Retain Judge Craven was appointed to the bench in January 1991. The responses to the Judicial Department Questionnaire were outstandingly favorable – 90% in questions after questions. The written comments made in the questionnaire were strongly supportive. To balance the cheers for this judge, the Commission notes that, although all groups rate Judge Craven highly on fairness of sentencing, most groups rate him at a lesser percentage on the clarity of his oral decisions and on his written decisions. The attorneys, however, rate him highly on the clarity of his oral and written decisions. It is possible that his decisions are not well understood by the citizens before him as they might be. All in all, the ratings and the comments were highly favorable. On the other hand, the Committee did receive some comment that Judge Craven is occasionally impatient with attorneys and witnesses and sometimes exhibits a tendency to interject himself into the case. A typical, favorable comment is as follows:   “Judge Craven is an extremely diligent and well organized trial judge. He is always very well prepared for trial or hearing and thoroughly familiar with pleadings and briefs that have been filed. He is prompt in making rulings, and his rulings are clear and concise. He runs an extremely efficient and organized docket. He is very much in control of the courtroom and the presentation of evidence. He is very efficient in the use of court time. An excellent judge.” Several other comments were favorable. The Ninth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge T. Peter Craven BE RETAINED.

Surveys & reports

No survey reports on record for this judge.

Sources