← All judges

Jose D.L. Marquez

Court of Appeals

Meets Standards(Retain)3 cycles on record

Evaluation history

  • 2006 retention cycle
    Court of Appeals
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    VotersRetained· 65.5% yes
    803,631 yes · 423,428 no50% needed to retain
    Reports: 2006 Retention Survey Report Need an accessible PDF Document version? Please click on the link below and email our staff Contact Us The State Commission on Judicial Performance recommends by a vote of 6 to 4 that Judge José D. L. Márquez BE RETAINED. Background: Judge Márquez was appointed to the Colorado Court of Appeals in 1988. Prior to that he was a District Court Judge in the 21st Judicial District for four years. He graduated from St. John's University, the University of Texas School of Law, and in 2001 he received an LL.M. from the University of Virginia Law School. He was in private practice in Grand Junction (1978-1984), a Colorado Assistant Attorney General (1975-1977), an attorney for Colorado Rural Legal Services (1972-1975), and an Assistant Staff Judge Advocate, United States Air Force (1971-1972). He has served on the governing boards of the Colorado, Denver, and Hispanic Bar Associations, and is active in the Minoru Yasui Inn of Court. In 2004 the Colorado Hispanic Bar Association honored him with its Lifetime Achievement Award. Strengths: Attorneys who responded to survey questions rated Judge Márquez as at the survey average for: (1) allowing parties to present their arguments and answer questions, (2) treating parties equally regardless of race, sex, or economic status, and (3) being courteous toward attorneys. Judge Márquez was also rated at the survey average for: (1) making reasoned decisions based upon the law and facts and (2) for refraining from reaching issues that need not be decided. Attorneys commented that the judge displays a respectful judicial demeanor. Weaknesses: Attorneys rated Judge Márquez slightly below the survey average of other Court of Appeals judges for: (1) writing opinions that are clear, (2) writing opinions that adequately explain the basis of the Court's decision, and (3) being prepared for oral argument. Recommendation: 65% of attorneys surveyed and 92% of judges surveyed strongly recommended that Judge Márquez be retained in office. Overall, 95% of attorneys and 99% of judges supported his retention. Although the Commission recommends that Judge Márquez be retained, several commissioners were disappointed with the variable quality of some of his opinions and sporadic departures from controlling law, especially given the length of time he has been on the bench.
  • 1998 retention cycle
    Court of Appeals
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    VotersRetained· 71.1% yes
    691,536 yes · 281,495 no50% needed to retain
    Retention Year: 1998 Recommendation: Retain The State Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Jose D. L. Marquez BE RETAINED. Judge Marquez was appointed to the Colorado Court of Appeals in 1988. Previous to his appointment to the Court of Appeals, he was a District Court Judge in the 21st Judicial District, he was in private practice in Grand Junction, 1978-1984, a Regional Assistant Attorney General for the State of Colorado, 1975-1977, and an attorney for the Colorado Rural Legal Services, 1972-1975. Judge Marquez is an active member of the Colorado, Denver, and Hispanic Bar Associations, the American Judicature Society, the Colorado Bar Fellows and the Minoru Yasui Inn of Court. He is on the Board of Continuing Legal and Judicial Education, the Supreme Court Committee on Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Judicial Conference Planning Committee. Judge Marquez' commitment to community service is evidenced by his continuing interest in Colorado Rural Legal Services. The State Commission believes that this experience is of great value. He is currently serving on a committee that is studying effective changes to the Colorado Legal Services and the Legal Services agencies. In addition, Judge Marquez is quite insightful about the need for and use of language interpreters in the courts. Attorney questionnaires received by the State Commission rate Judge Marquez highly overall. He received especially high marks for patience at oral argument, and treating parties equally regardless of gender, race and social/economic status. Of the attorney responses received, 81.8% voted to retain Judge Marquez and 18.2% voted not to retain him.
  • 1990 retention cycle
    Court of Appeals
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    VotersRetained· 64.5% yes
    497,951 yes · 274,654 no50% needed to retain
    Retention Year: 1990 Recommendation: Retain Judicial Performance Commission’s recommendation: Should Be Retained. Judge Marquez received his undergraduate degree in philosophy from St. John’s University in Collegeville, Minn., in 1964. He received his law degree from the University of Texas at Austin in 1970 and was admitted to the Colorado Bar in 1972. He experience prior to his appointment included private law practice, 1978-84, and service as counsel for several government agencies in the following capacities: assistant staff judge advocate, United State Air Force, 1971-72; staff and supervisory attorney, Colorado Rural Legal Services, 1972-75; and regional assistant attorney general, 1975-77. Marquez was appointed as a District Court Judge for the 21st Judicial District in 1984 and served in that capacity until his appointment to the Colorado Court of Appeals in 1988. Attorneys and trial court judges noted Marquez has a strong sense of his role as a member of the court. He has quickly adapted to the demand of the Court of Appeals. Trial judge indicate an overall high performance. He was particularly praised for the consistency of his opinions and his decisiveness.

Surveys & reports

  • 2006 cycle
    • 2006 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
      Read full retention survey textexpand
      ## Page 1 State of Colorado Logo COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE TThhee HHoonnoorraabbllee JJoossee DD.. LL.. MMaarrqquueezz 2006 Judicial Performance Survey ## Page 2 April, 26 2006 The Honorable Jose D. L. Marquez Colorado Court of Appeals Colorado State Judicial Bldg. 2 East 14th Ave. Denver, Co. 80203 Dear Judge Marquez: Every two years the Colorado Judicial Performance Commission conducts a survey of attorneys who have had cases with opinions authored or co-authored by those appellate court judges who face a retention vote in the next general election, and a second survey among all the State’s judges and justices. This report contains the results of these two surveys. 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 2a through 2l) 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. · Survey of Judges Results & Comments: Similar to the Attorney section, this portion of the report contains graphs (again including the overall average of questions 1 through 10 on the Survey of Judges questionnaire), the percentage distribution of responses by the trail judges to each substantive question in the survey. The judges 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 Survey of Judges questionnaire is also at the back of this report. · Methodology: The fourth section of the report discusses the methodology of the survey. · Questionnaires: And the final section provides copies of the questionnaires that were used. 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 Director of the Colorado Judicial Performance Program, Jane Howell, at 303-837-3665. Best regards, Paul A. Talmey President enc: 100 Arap ahoe, Suite One, Boulder, CO 80302 Phone 303.443.5300 Fax 303.447.9386 ## Page 3 SSuurrvveeyy ooff JJuuddggeess ## Page 4 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges Average Grades: Questions 1 through 9 and Overall Average 3.7 Overall average of 1 through 14 3.7 1. Being fair and impartial toward 3.7 both sides of the case. 3.7 3.5 2. Writing opinions that are clear. 3.6 3. Writing opinions that 3.6 adequately explain the basis of the Court's decision. 3.7 3.5 4. Issuing opinions in a timely manner. 3.5 3.8 5. Making decisions without regard to possible criticism. 3.7 3.6 6. Making the correct decision based upon the law and facts. 3.7 3.6 7. Refraining from reaching issues that need not be decided. 3.7 8. Treating parties equally 3.9 regardless of race, sex or economic status. 3.8 3.8 9. Not engaging in ex parte communications. 3.8 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4 Judge Marquez Average Grade Court of Appeals Judges except Judge Marquez Judicial Performance Survey 2006 Page 1 ## Page 5 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges Retention Recommendation 100% 92% 90% 90% 85% 83% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% ` 30% 20% 10% 8% 8% 8% 8% 7% 6% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% o n gl y n ot r et ai n w h at n ot r et ai n U n d e ci d e d o m e w h at r et ai n St r o n gl y r et ai n o n gl y n ot r et ai n w h at n ot r et ai n o m e w h at r et ai n St r o n gl y r et ai n St r m e S St r m e S o o S S Including Undecided J u d g e M a rq u e z Excluding Undecided Court of Appeals Judges except Judge Marquez Judicial Performance Survey 2006 Page 2 ## Page 6 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 1. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Being fair and impartial toward both sides of the case?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 64% 61% B 14% 16% C 3% 3% D 1% 0% Fail 0% No Grade 18% 19% Average 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 7 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 2. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Writing opinions that are clear?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 54% 61% B 33% 25% C 4% 3% D 1% 0% Fail No Grade 8% 11% Average 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 8 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 3. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Writing opinions that adequately explain the basis of the Court's decision?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 56% 64% B 32% 23% C 1% 2% D 1% 1% Fail No Grade 9% 11% Average 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 9 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 4. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Issuing opinions in a timely manner?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 39% 39% B 25% 25% C 3% 4% D 1% 1% Fail No Grade 32% 32% Average 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 10 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 5. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Making decisions without regard to possible criticism?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 66% 66% B 16% 14% C 1% 3% D 1% 0% Fail No Grade 16% 17% Average 3.8 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 11 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 6. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Making reasoned decision based upon the law and facts?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 65% 68% B 23% 18% C 3% 3% D 1% 1% Fail No Grade 8% 10% Average 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 12 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 7. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Refraining from reaching issues that need not be decided.?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 56% 58% B 24% 19% C 3% 3% D 1% 0% Fail 0% No Grade 17% 19% Average 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 13 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 8. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Treating parties equally regardless of race, sex or economic status?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 68% 64% B 9% 10% C 1% 2% D 0% Fail No Grade 22% 24% Average 3.9 3.8 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 14 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges 9. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Not engaging in ex parte communications?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 52% 50% B 8% 8% C 1% 1% D Fail No Grade 40% 41% Average 3.8 3.8 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 15 Jose D. L. Marquez Survey of Judges R10e.t Do you recommend that Judge Marquez be retained in office or not be retained in office? Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez Strongly Recommend 92% 90% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 7% 8% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 1% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 1% 0% Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 10 ## Page 16 AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy ## Page 17 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey Average Grades: Questions 2a through 2l and Overall Average 3.5 Overall average of 2a through 2l 3.5 3.5 2a. Being fair and impartial toward both sides of the case. 3.5 3.3 2b. Writing opinions that are clear. 3.4 2c. Writing opinions that adequately explain the basis of 3.3 the Court's decision. 3.4 3.5 2d. Issuing opinions in a timely manner. 3.4 2e. Having knowledge of the rules of evidence and 3.8 proceedure. 3.7 3.6 2f. Making decisions without regard to possible criticism. 3.5 2g. Making reasoned decisions based upon the law and 3.3 facts. 3.3 2h. Refraining from reaching issues that need not be 3.4 decided. 3.5 2i. Treating parties equally regardless of race, sex or 3.8 economic status. 3.8 3.8 2j. Being courteous toward attorneys. 3.8 3.9 2k. Not engaging in ex parte communications. 3.9 3.6 2l. Being prepared for oral argument. 3.7 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4 Judge Marquez Average Grade Court of Appeals Judges except Judge Marquez Judicial Performance Survey 2006 Page 1 ## Page 18 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 90% 80% 80% 69% 70% 65% 59% 60% 50% 40% ` 30% 30% 27% 20% 14% 14% 12% 9% 10% 5% 5% 4% 3% 3% 2% 0% o n gl y n ot r et ai n w h at n ot r et ai n U n d e ci d e d o m e w h at r et ai n St r o n gl y r et ai n o n gl y n ot r et ai n w h at n ot r et ai n o m e w h at r et ai n St r o n gl y r et ai n St r m e S St r m e S o o S S Including Undecided Excluding Undecided Judge Marquez Court of Appeals Judges except Judge Marquez Judicial Performance Survey 2006 Page 2 ## Page 19 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Being fair and impartial toward both sides of the case?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 50% 61% B 33% 14% C 4% 11% D 3% Fail No Grade 13% 11% Average 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 20 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Writing opinions that are clear?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 50% 60% B 25% 23% C 13% 8% D 4% 5% Fail No Grade 8% 5% Average 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 21 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Writing opinions that adequately explain the basis of the Court's decision?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 54% 58% B 17% 22% C 17% 10% D 4% 5% Fail No Grade 8% 5% Average 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 22 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Issuing opinions in a timely manner?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 52% 53% B 39% 26% C 4% 10% D 2% Fail 1% No Grade 4% 8% Average 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 23 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Allowing parties to present their arguments and answer questions?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 54% 50% B 17% 11% C 5% D Fail No Grade 29% 34% Average 3.8 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 24 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Making decisions without regard to possible criticism?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 46% 47% B 25% 11% C 7% D 2% Fail No Grade 29% 33% Average 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 25 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Making reasoned decisions based upon the law and facts?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 50% 56% B 38% 20% C 4% 11% D 8% Fail 4% 2% No Grade 4% 5% Average 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 26 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2h. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Refraining from reaching issues that need not be decided?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 46% 56% B 17% 18% C 8% 5% D 4% 3% Fail 2% No Grade 25% 17% Average 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 27 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2i. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Treating parties equally regardless of race, sex or economic status?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 63% 53% B 8% 6% C 4% 4% D Fail No Grade 25% 37% Average 3.8 3.8 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 28 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2j. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Being courteous toward attorneys?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 50% 55% B 13% 9% C 2% D Fail No Grade 38% 34% Average 3.8 3.8 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 10 ## Page 29 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2k. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Not engaging in ex parte communications?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 54% 46% B 4% 2% C 2% D Fail No Grade 42% 50% Average 3.9 3.9 Letter Grade A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 11 ## Page 30 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 2l. How would you grade Judge Marquez on "Being prepared for oral argument?" Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez A 39% 45% B 22% 9% C 3% D Fail No Grade 39% 42% Average 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 12 ## Page 31 Jose D. L. Marquez Attorney Survey 3. Do you recommend that Judge Marquez be retained in office or not be retained in office? Court of Appeals Judge Judges except Marquez Judge Marquez Strongly Recommend 65% 80% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 30% 14% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 5% 3% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 4% Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 13 ## Page 32 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy ## Page 33 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy Sample: The Colorado Judicial Department provided Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc. with names and addresses of attorneys who, in the previous 12 months, had a case decided by the Colorado Court of Appeals, of which the decision had been authored or co-authored by one of the six Court of Appeals judges up for a retention vote in 2006. Talmey-Drake Research was also provided with the list of Colorado judges and justices. Two surveys were conducted, one among attorneys who had opinions authored or co-authored by one of the six Court of Appeals judges facing a retention vote in 2006, and a second survey of all Colorado judges and justices. Questionnaire: Copies of the two questionnaires used are provided at the end of this report. Respondents were asked to use a grade of A, B, C, D, or F (Fail) to assess the judge’s performance in a number of different areas. These grades were then converted to a numerical value where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. Response: The response rate is calculated as the number of completed questionnaires divided by the number of eligible respondents who actually received a questionnaire. The following table shows the total number of questionnaires mailed, completed, non-responses & refusals, undeliverables and other responses. The table presents the overall response rate for each survey as well as the response rate for your surveys. Overall Response Rate Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Respondent Type Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate Attorneys 405 160 2 40 43.8% Judges 266 154 35 66.7% Response Rate for Judge Marquez Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Respondent Type Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate Attorneys 69 24 1 4 36.9% Judges 266 154 35 66.7% 1 ## Page 34 Results: The results of the Survey are in two main sections: Attorney Respondents and Judge 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 the combined averages for all the other Court of Appeals judges for which surveys in 2006 were conducted. 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 a comparative column of results showing the results for that question for all other Court of Appeals judges for which surveys were conducted in 2006. Comments: Each respondent was encouraged to comment on the judge’s performance. This section contains these comments—again divided between results from attorneys and judges. 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%. 2 ## Page 35 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 36 QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirreess ## Page 37 Additional Comments _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Commission on Judicial Performance _ _ Appellate Questionnaire _ Evaluation of _ [JUDGE NAME] _ _ _ 1. Which of the following types of cases have you _ appealed in which Judge [Name] authored or _ co-authored the decision? (Please circle all that apply.) _ _ Civil. 1 Criminal. 2 _ Domestic. 3 _ Juvenile. 4 Other. 5 _ _ ## Page 38 2. Using a grade scale, where an “A” is excellent along with B, C, D or F 3. Comments about Judge [Name]’s relating to any of your responses to the for fail, please grade the Judge [Name] on the following. If, for a previous questions? specific question you feel that you do not have enough information to grade Judge [Name], please circle the number indicating “Can’t Grade.” _ Can’t _ A B C D F Grade _ a. Being fair and impartial toward each side of the case. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ b. Writing opinions that are clear. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ c. Writing opinions that adequately explain _ the basis of the Court’s decision. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ d. Issuing opinions in a timely manner. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ e. Allowing parties to present their arguments and answer questions. 4 3 2 1 0 9 4. Keeping in mind your responses to each of the previous questions, how f. Making decisions without regard to strongly do you recommend that Judge [Name] be retained in office, or possible criticism. 4 3 2 1 0 9 not retained in office? g. Making reasoned decisions based upon Strongly recommend [he/she] be retained in office. 5 the law and facts. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Somewhat recommend [he/she] be retained in office. 4 h. Refraining from reaching issues that Undecided or don’t know enough to make recommendation. 3 need not be decided. 4 3 2 1 0 9 Somewhat recommend [he/she] not be retained in office. 2 i. Treating parties equally regardless of Strongly recommend [he/she] not be retained in office. 1 race, sex or economic status. 4 3 2 1 0 9 j. Being courteous toward attorneys. 4 3 2 1 0 9 And why do you think that way about retaining or not retaining Judge [Name] ? k. Not engaging in ex parte communications. 4 3 2 1 0 9 l. Being prepared for oral argument. 4 3 2 1 0 9 _ _ _ _ _ _ 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. Please use back page for any additional comments. ## Page 39 Please write comments you would like to make about Judge Robert M. Russel in the space below. If you would like to make more comments than space allows, feel free to attach a sheet with additional comments. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Survey of Colorado Judges _ _ Please answer the enclosed questions about each of the five _ Court of Appeals judges who are standing for retention in November 2006. For questions 1 through 10 please grade each of the judges using a grade scale where an “A” indicates you believe the judge or justice is doing excellent on that aspect of his or her job, a “D” indicates that you believe he or she is doing poorly on that aspect of the job and an “F” indicates that you believe the judge or justice is failing at that task. B’s and C’s indicate that you believe the judge or justice is performing between excellent and poor on the particular task. If, for a specific question, you feel that you do not have enough information to grade the judge on the task, or for some reason feel that you cannot grade him or her on the Please mail the completed questionnaire in the item, please circle the number that indicates “no grade.” enclosed postage-paid envelope. Thank you. Thank you. 8 ## Page 40 1. Being fair and impartial toward each side in a case. C. Please write comments you would like to make about No Judge Alan M. Loeb in the space below. If you would like to A B C D F Grade make more comments than space allows, feel free to attach a Judge Russell E. Carparelli. 4 3 2 1 0 6 sheet with additional comments. Judge Janice B. Davidson. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Alan M. Loeb. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Jose D.L. Marquez. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Robert M. Russel. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ _ 2. Writing opinions that are clear. _ No A B C D F Grade _ Judge Russell E. Carparelli. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Janice B. Davidson. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Alan M. Loeb. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Jose D.L. Marquez. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Robert M. Russel. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ 3. Writing opinions that adequately explain the basis of the D. Please write comments you would like to make about Court’s decision. Judge Jose D. L. Marquez in the space below. If you would No like to make more comments than space allows, feel free to A B C D F Grade attach a sheet with additional comments. Judge Russell E. Carparelli. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Janice B. Davidson. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Alan M. Loeb. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Jose D.L. Marquez. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Robert M. Russel. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ 4. Issuing opinions in a timely manner. _ No _ A B C D F Grade _ Judge Russell E. Carparelli. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Janice B. Davidson. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Alan M. Loeb. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Jose D.L. Marquez. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Robert M. Russel. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Continued on Back Page 2 7 ## Page 41 A. Please write comments you would like to make about Judge Russell E. Carparelli in the space below. If you would like to 5. Making decisions without regard to possible criticism. make more comments than space allows, feel free to attach a sheet with additional comments. No _ A B C D F Grade _ Judge Russell E. Carparelli. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Janice B. Davidson. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Alan M. Loeb. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Judge Jose D.L. Marquez. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Robert M. Russel. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ _ _ 6. Making reasoned decisions based upon the law and facts. _ No _ A B C D F Grade Judge Russell E. Carparelli. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Judge Janice B. Davidson. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Judge Alan M. Loeb. 4 3 2 1 0 6 B. Please write comments you would like to make about Judge Judge Jose D.L. Marquez. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Janice B. Davidson in the space below. If you would like to Judge Robert M. Russel. 4 3 2 1 0 6 make more comments than space allows, feel free to attach a sheet with additional comments. _ 7. Refraining from reaching issues that need not be _ decided. _ No _ A B C D F Grade Judge Russell E. Carparelli. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Janice B. Davidson. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Alan M. Loeb. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Jose D.L. Marquez. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ Judge Robert M. Russel. 4 3 2 1 0 6 _ _ _ _ 6 3 ## Page 42 8. Treating parties equally regardless of race, sex or 10. Recommend to be retained/not economic status. retained in office. No Judge Judge Judge A B C D F Grade Carparelli Davidson Loeb Judge Russell E. Carparelli............ 4 3 2 1 0 6 Strongly recommend to retain ...... 5 5 5 Judge Janice B. Davidson.............. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Somewhat recommend to retain... 4 4 4 Judge Alan M. Loeb....................... 4 3 2 1 0 6 Undecided or don’t know enough Judge Jose D.L. Marquez.............. 4 3 2 1 0 6 to make recommendation......... 3 3 3 Judge Robert M. Russel................. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Somewhat recommend not retain. 2 2 2 Strongly recommend not retain.... 1 1 1 9. Not engaging in ex parte communications. Judge Judge No Marquez Russel A B C D F Grade Strongly recommend to retain....... 5 5 Judge Russell E. Carparelli............ 4 3 2 1 0 6 Somewhat recommend to retain... 4 4 Judge Janice B. Davidson.............. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Undecided or don’t know enough Judge Alan M. Loeb....................... 4 3 2 1 0 6 to make recommendation......... 3 3 Judge Jose D.L. Marquez.............. 4 3 2 1 0 6 Somewhat recommend not retain. 2 2 Judge Robert M. Russel.................... 4 3 2 1 0 6 Strongly recommend not retain.... 1 1 4 5

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