Jackson L. Peters Jr.

Evaluation history

• 2008 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Teller · Teller

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  VotersRetained· 74.9% yes

  7,968 yes · 2,666 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 Fourth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends by a unanimous vote that Judge Jackson L. Peters Jr. BE RETAINED. Background: Judge Peters was appointed to the County Court for Teller County in August 1989. He is a 1969 graduate of Coral Gables Senior High School, in Coral Gables, Florida, and attended Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, where received a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in Journalism in 1973. Judge Peters went on to attend the University of Georgia School of Law, where he received his JD in 1978. Before his appointment to the bench, Judge Peters was a staff attorney with Pikes Peak Legal Services. Judge Peters has been extremely active in the judicial process and the community in Teller County, making many efforts to improve judicial efficiency, while at the same time working to reduce social and criminal problems in Teller County. He helped develop a Court sponsored Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) program, and is working to create a similar program in El Paso County. Judge Peters, along with other civic leaders, participated in the development of the Teller County Methamphetamine Task Force. This group developed a model program of drug education which actively seeks to reduce drug activity through education. Judge Peters also helped develop a Teller County Drug Court, a program open to first time felony drug users who have not committed a violent crime, and a DUI Court intended to deal with repeat DUI offenders. Judge Peters’ docket includes civil, criminal and traffic cases. Strengths: Judge Peters brings tremendous experience to the County Court bench and the issues with which County Court Judges regularly deal. The responses from attorneys responding to surveys indicate a satisfaction with his judicial abilities well above his peers. His non-attorney surveys repeatedly cited is strong knowledge of the law and his compassion. His community involvement has extended his contributions beyond his presence on the bench. Weaknesses: Judge Peters is seen as hard on DUI offenders, by both attorneys and non-attorneys. Some non-attorney respondents indicated intolerance for lack of timeliness by defendants and litigants. Recommendation: In making its recommendation, the Commission considered the results of surveys from 46 attorney and 171 non-attorneys, Judge Peters’ own self evaluation, submitted written opinions and courtroom observations by Commission members, along with the judicial interview conducted by the Commission. Judge Peters was recommended for retention by 96% of the attorneys and 78% of the non-attorneys.
• 2004 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Teller · Teller

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  VotersRetained· 69.0% yes

  6,847 yes · 3,075 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 Fourth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. BE RETAINED, with a vote of nine to zero. Judge Peters was appointed to the Teller County Court in August, 1989. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Judge Peters was staff attorney for Pikes Peak Legal Services, specializing in landlord/tenant, consumer law and civil rights. Judge Peters received his Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree in Journalism from Southern Methodist University in 1973, and received his Juris Doctor Degree from the University of Georgia School of Law in 1978. In between college and law school, he worked for two years as a reporter. Judge Peters presently hears criminal, civil, traffic, domestic relations, and juvenile cases. The Commission reviewed written evaluations of Judge Peters from attorneys and non-attorneys, including written verbatim comments attached to the evaluation questionnaires. The Commission also considered Judge Peters' self-evaluation, conducted a personal interview, and a courtroom observation. Judge Peters received high mark in practically all categories. Attorneys voted for retention was 74% and 3% not retained. Non-attorneys recommended retention by 71% and 15% not retain. In the past two to three years, Judge Peters has been fulfilling his County Court duties in four days per week, while assisting in District Court on Fridays. Judge Peters works at explaining his decisions for all to understand. He is patient with first time defendants to help them understand the process, and has great compassion for children. Judge Peters encourages settlement on civil cases and traffic cases. Judge Peters enjoys outside activities and also volunteers through his Church to a non-profit group called ‘In The Lord's Service.’ He is currently on the Board of North Teller County Build-A-Generation, a non-profit organization seeking to develop risk-prevention focused programs for juveniles. He is very focused on his family because his children are young and he wants to be there for them.
• 2000 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Teller · Teller

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  Retention Year: 2000 Recommendation: Retain The Fourth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. BE RETAINED. Judge Peters was appointed to the Teller County bench in August 1989. Prior to his appointment to the bench, he was a staff attorney with Pikes Peak Legal Services specializing in Consumer Housing and Civil Rights issues. Judge Peters is currently on the Board of the East Teller County Build-A-Generation, a non-profit organization seeking to develop risk-prevention focused programs for juveniles. Since his appointment in 1989, Judge Peters has presided over criminal, civil, juvenile and traffic cases. Judge Peters is the only Fourth Judicial District County Judge that serves Teller County. Judge Peters has a large number of pro se litigants in his courtroom, which is a challenge to maintaining a hospitable, non-threatening environment for the resolution of conflict. Judge Peters by his own admission is in the perpetual pursuit of perfect patience. He has experienced approximately 10% reduction in case load in Teller County and spends one day per week in the El Paso County courthouse presiding over Domestic cases and helping with the overloaded Fourth Judicial District County docket. Attorney questionnaires received by the Fourth Judicial District Commission rate Judge Peters above average in all areas surveyed, especially in the areas of fairness and communication. Of the attorney responses received, 86% voted to retain Judge Peters, 9% voted not to retain and 5% had no opinion. Major strength is his human approach to the practice of law and his ability to provide accessibility to the bench in a small mountain community. The Commission was impressed with the time and honesty that Judge Peters put into his self-evaluation and the thoroughness in which he critiqued himself and strives for personal growth.
• 1996 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Teller · Teller

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  Retention Year: 1996 Recommendation: Retain It is the opinion of the Fourth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance that Judge Jackson L. Peters should be retained. Judge Peters was appointed to the Teller County Court in 1989 and has been the County Judge since that time. The Teller County Court sits in Cripple Creek and the Judge hears an entire range of cases that come before the County Court and because he is the only regular sitting Judge in Cripple Creek, also hears juvenile cases, small claims and acts as a District Court Judge on assignment. Judge Peters obtained a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree at Southern Methodist University in 1973, and a Juris Doctorate from the University of Georgia in 1978. From 1978 to 1980, he served as a Staff Attorney at the Colorado Rural Legal Services Office in Alamosa and form 1980 to 1989 he serves as a Staff Attorney for Pike Peak Legal Services at Colorado Springs. Evaluations received from attorneys rate Judge Peters very favorably with an overall retention rating of 86.5%. An overwhelming number of attorneys thought he was punctual, knowledgeable and maintains appropriate demeanor and control in the courtroom. The jurors that appeared before him thought he was an exemplary judge.
• 1992 retention cycle

  Trial Court · Teller · Teller

  Meets Standards(Retain)
  Retention Year: 1992 Recommendation: Retain Judge Jackson L. Peters Jr. was appointed by Governor Roy Romer on August 20, 1989. He handles a widely varied caseload including divorces, traffic offenses, felony and misdemeanors litigation, and other types of disputes. He graduated from Southern Methodist University in 1973 and worked for two years as a reporter for the Montrose Daily Press. After receiving his Doctor of Jurisprudence degree from the University of Georgia Law School in 1978, Judge Peters returned to Colorado and served as staff attorney to Colorado Rural Legal Services in Alamosa for two years and Pike’s Peak Legal Services for nine years. Since his appointment, he has been given high ratings from nearly all the respondents. Among those polled, including trial attorneys, litigants, jurors, courthouse personnel, and law enforcement personnel, 91.2% stated he performed his duties in a most efficient manner. The trial attorneys gave his a jury perfect rating, with only 6.7% of those who returned questionnaires said he could do a “better job” of sentencing and “clarifying” his written and oral opinions. While there were a few negative opinions all agreed Judge Peters is fair and controls his docket efficiently. He is courteous to everyone and when necessary takes time to provide procedural explanations. The 4th Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Jackson L. Peters Jr. be retained.

Surveys & reports

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

    ## Page 1 State off Colorado LLogo COOMMISSIOON ON JUUDICIALL PERFORRMANCEE JJaacccckkssoonn LL.. PPeetttteerrss,, JJJJrr.. 22008 Juudicial PPerformmance Suurvey ## Page 2 April 30, 2008 The Honorable Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Teller County Courthouse P.O. Box 997 Cripple Creek, CO. 80813 Dear Judge Peters: 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. 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 4466)) ## Page 5 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. 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 3.6 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 3.7 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.4 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 AAvveerraaggee GGrraaddee Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 6 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. 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 3.7 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 3.7 1e. [Civil only] Assisting parties to 3.1 reach agreement 3.0 3.8 1f. Maintaining appropriate 3.6 control over proceedings 3.5 3.7 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 7 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.6 Q2. Overall App & Knowldge of 3.3 LLaaww 3.3 3.6 2a. Basing decisions on evidence 3.3 and arguments 3.3 3.7 2b. Giving reasons for rulings 3.3 3.4 3.4 2c. [Civil only] Issuing written 3.1 findings of fact and law 3.2 3.3 2d. Willing to reconsider error in 2.9 ffaacctt oorr llaaww 2.9 3.6 2e. Having knowledge of relevant 3.3 substantive law 3.3 3.7 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 3.5 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 3.7 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 8 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Communications 3.9 Q3. Overall Communications 3.7 3.7 3.9 3a. Speaking clearly 3.7 3.7 3.9 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 9 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Demeanor 3.8 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.4 3.5 3.9 4a. Giving proceedings a sense 3.5 of dignity 3.5 3.8 4b. Treating everyone involved 3.5 politely 33.44 3.7 4c. Having empathy with the 3.3 parties involved 3.3 3.8 4d. Treating participants with 3.5 respect 3.5 3.7 4e. Presenting a neutral 3.3 presence on the bench 3.4 3.7 4f. Being consistent in [his/her] 3.5 behavior 3.5 33.77 4g. Conducting [his/her] 3.4 courtroom in a neutral manner 3.4 3.8 4h. Giving all participants an 3.6 opportunity to be heard 3.6 3.7 44ii. CCoonnssiisstteennttllyy aappppllyyiinngg llaawwss 3.4 and rules 3.4 3.9 4j. Not engaging in ex parte 3.6 communications 3.7 3.8 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 10 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Diligence 3.7 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.4 3.7 55aa. MMaakkiinngg ttoouugghh ddeecciissiioonnss wwhheenn 3.4 necessary 3.4 3.6 5b. Using good judgment in apppplication of relevant law and 3.3 rules 3.3 3.7 5c. Doing the necessary 'homework' and being prepared 3.4 for [[his/her]] cases 3.4 3.8 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 11 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Q6. Average: How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is toward the defense or prosecution? Jackson L. Peters,, Jr. 0.6 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Q7. Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Peters, Jr.'s sentences? Jackson L. Peters, Jr. 0.7 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Retention Recommendation 110000%% 90% 87% 87% 80% 77%77% 7744%% 7733%% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 13%13% 12%12% 9% 9% 10% 6% 6%6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% Including Undecided Excluding Undecided Judge Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 14 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Promptly making rulings during trial?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 74% 54% 57% B 11% 18% 18% C 2% 4% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 1% No Grade 13% 23% 21% Average 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 15 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 70% 58% 62% B 28% 28% 25% C 2% 9% 7% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 0% 1% 2% Average 3.7 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 16 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Allotting appropriate amount of time for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 74% 58% 56% B 20% 29% 28% C 2% 7% 8% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 17 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Keeping cases moving according to schedule?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 71% 58% 58% B 24% 30% 28% C 2% 6% 7% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 18 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "[Civil only] Assisting parties to reach agreement?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 53% 22% 23% B 27% 18% 17% C 0% 6% 8% D 0% 2% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 20% 51% 47% Average 3.7 3.1 3.0 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 19 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1f. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 85% 67% 66% B 11% 22% 22% C 4% 6% 7% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 0% 1% 2% Average 3.8 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 20 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1g. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 59% 42% 44% B 20% 19% 21% C 2% 6% 8% D 0% 2% 3% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 20% 30% 24% Average 3.7 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade A- B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 21 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1h. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 63% 47% 48% B 17% 15% 16% C 0% 4% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 20% 32% 29% Average 3.8 3.6 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 22 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1i. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 76% 55% 54% B 20% 26% 26% C 2% 6% 8% D 0% 2% 3% Fail 0% 1% 2% No Grade 2% 9% 8% Average 3.8 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 23 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Basing decisions on evidence and arguments?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 70% 53% 54% B 22% 25% 25% C 7% 9% 9% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 2% 5% 5% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 10 ## Page 24 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 73% 55% 56% B 20% 25% 25% C 7% 9% 9% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "[Civil only] Issuing written findings of fact and law?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 28% 20% 27% B 31% 12% 16% C 3% 4% 6% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 38% 60% 47% Average 3.4 3.1 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 12 ## Page 26 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Willing to reconsider error in fact or law?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 36% 26% 27% B 29% 17% 18% C 11% 9% 9% D 2% 5% 5% Fail 0% 4% 4% No Grade 22% 40% 38% Average 3.3 2.9 2.9 Letter Grade B B- B- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 13 ## Page 27 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having knowledge of relevant substantive law?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 65% 51% 54% B 30% 29% 28% C 4% 8% 9% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 0% 4% 4% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 14 ## Page 28 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having knowledge of rules of procedure and evidence?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 69% 57% 60% B 24% 25% 24% C 4% 8% 8% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 15 ## Page 29 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 76% 58% 58% B 17% 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2h. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "[Criminal only] Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 46% 44% 36% B 17% 20% 18% C 6% 6% 5% D 3% 3% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 29% 26% 37% Average 3.5 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 17 ## Page 31 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2i. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible criticism?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 70% 55% 54% B 15% 20% 20% C 4% 7% 7% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 9% 12% 14% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 18 ## Page 32 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2j. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making decisions without fear of being appealed?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 70% 54% 55% B 20% 21% 20% C 2% 5% 6% D 2% 3% 2% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 7% 16% 16% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 19 ## Page 33 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Speaking clearly?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 93% 78% 76% B 4% 18% 18% C 2% 3% 4% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 0% No Grade 0% 0% 1% Average 3.9 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 20 ## Page 34 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making sure all participants understand the proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 89% 71% 71% B 11% 22% 21% C 0% 4% 5% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 0% 1% 2% Average 3.9 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 21 ## Page 35 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Using understandable language?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 87% 77% 76% B 13% 19% 19% C 0% 3% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% 0% No Grade 0% 0% 1% Average 3.9 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 22 ## Page 36 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 89% 69% 69% B 11% 20% 20% C 0% 6% 6% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 0% 0% 1% Average 3.9 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 23 ## Page 37 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating everyone involved politely?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 84% 69% 69% B 9% 17% 17% C 4% 6% 7% D 2% 4% 3% Fail 0% 4% 4% No Grade 0% 0% 1% Average 3.8 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 24 ## Page 38 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having empathy with the parties involved?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 76% 56% 55% B 22% 22% 22% C 2% 10% 10% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 4% 4% No Grade 0% 3% 4% Average 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 25 ## Page 39 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating participants with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 84% 68% 68% B 11% 19% 18% C 4% 6% 7% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 0% 0% 1% Average 3.8 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 26 ## Page 40 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Presenting a neutral presence on the bench?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 78% 62% 64% B 18% 21% 20% C 2% 8% 8% D 2% 5% 4% Fail 0% 3% 4% No Grade 0% 1% 1% Average 3.7 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade A- B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 27 ## Page 41 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4f. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being consistent in [his/her] behavior?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 80% 64% 64% B 13% 22% 21% C 4% 6% 7% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 0% 3% 4% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 28 ## Page 42 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4g. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Conducting [his/her] courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 76% 63% 64% B 20% 21% 20% C 4% 7% 7% D 0% 4% 4% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 0% 1% 2% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 29 ## Page 43 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4h. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving all participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 84% 70% 70% B 11% 20% 19% C 4% 6% 6% D 0% 2% 2% Fail 0% 1% 2% No Grade 0% 1% 1% Average 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 30 ## Page 44 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4i. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Consistently applying laws and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 76% 60% 59% B 20% 20% 21% C 0% 8% 8% D 2% 3% 3% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 2% 6% 6% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 31 ## Page 45 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4j. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Not engaging in ex parte communications?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 73% 60% 64% B 7% 14% 12% C 0% 4% 3% D 0% 1% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 20% 20% 19% Average 3.9 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade A- B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 32 ## Page 46 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4k. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating pro se parties fairly?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 82% 55% 51% B 13% 14% 11% C 2% 4% 3% D 0% 2% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 24% 33% Average 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 33 ## Page 47 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making tough decisions when necessary?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 70% 51% 53% B 20% 23% 22% C 5% 7% 7% D 0% 3% 3% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 5% 15% 13% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 34 ## Page 48 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Using good judgment in application of relevant law and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 67% 54% 54% B 27% 25% 26% C 4% 9% 9% D 2% 4% 4% Fail 0% 3% 3% No Grade 0% 5% 4% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 35 ## Page 49 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Doing the necessary 'homework' and being prepared for [his/her] cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 70% 52% 56% B 20% 23% 24% C 0% 8% 8% D 2% 3% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 7% 12% 9% Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 36 ## Page 50 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time consuming?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 71% 51% 54% B 11% 17% 18% C 0% 6% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 0% 2% 2% No Grade 16% 21% 19% Average 3.8 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 37 ## Page 51 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Providing prompt access to the court in emergency matters?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 44% 38% 39% B 7% 14% 14% C 2% 4% 4% D 0% 2% 1% Fail 0% 1% 1% No Grade 47% 41% 40% Average 3.8 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 38 ## Page 52 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 0% 4% 3% ⇑ 4 3% 5% 4% 3 7% 7% 7% 2 10% 11% 10% 1 14% 15% 14% 0 Neutral 59% 53% 53% -1 3% 3% 4% -2 3% 1% 2% -3 0% 1% 2% -4 0% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 0% 0% 0% Average 0.6 0.9 0.7 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 39 ## Page 53 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Peters, Jr. are? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 0% 2% 2% ⇑ 4 3% 3% 3% 3 7% 5% 4% 2 10% 8% 8% 1 20% 11% 10% 0 Appropriate 57% 63% 60% -1 3% 4% 4% -2 0% 2% 3% -3 0% 2% 3% -4 0% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 0% 0% 1% Average 0.7 0.5 0.3 hsraH oT thgiL oT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 40 ## Page 54 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Peters, Jr. be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 Strongly Recommend 87% 77% 77% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 9% 13% 13% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 4% 5% 4% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 0% 6% 6% Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 41 ## Page 55 NNoonn--AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy ((SSaammppllee SSiizzee 117711)) ## Page 56 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. NNoonn-AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Overall and by Section 3.2 Overall Average 3.5 3.6 3.2 QQ11. OOvveerraallll DDeemmeeaannoorr 33.55 3.6 3.1 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.5 3.6 3.5 Q3. Overall 3.6 Communications 3.7 3.3 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.5 3.6 3.1 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 57 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Demeanor 3.2 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.5 3.6 33.33 1a. Giving court proceedings a 3.5 sense of dignity 3.6 3.2 1b. Treating participants politely 3.5 and with respect 3.6 3.0 1c. Conducting [his/her] 3.5 courtroom in a neutral manner 3.6 3.1 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 58 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. NNoonn-AAttttoorrnneeyy SSuurrvveeyy Average Grades: Fairness 3.1 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.5 3.6 3.2 2a. Giving participants an 3.5 opportunity to be heard 3.6 3.0 2b. Treating those involved with 3.5 the case without bias 3.5 3.1 2c. Treating fairly people who 3.4 represent themselves 3.5 3.2 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 59 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Communications 3.5 Q3. Overall Communications 3.6 3.7 3.4 3a. Making sure all participants understand the 3.6 proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom 3.6 3.4 3b. Using language that 3.6 everyone can understand 3.7 3.5 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 60 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Diligence 3.3 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.5 3.6 3.3 44a. BBegiinniing courtt on ttiime 33.44 3.4 3.4 4b. Maintaining appropriate 33..66 conttroll over proceeddiings 3.7 3.1 4c. Setting reasonable 3.5 sscchheedduulleess ffoorr ccaasseess 3.6 3.2 4d. Being prepared for [his/her] 3.6 cases 3.6 3.2 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 61 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.1 Q5. Overall App of Law 3.4 3.5 3.2 5a. Giving reasons for rulings 3.4 3.5 3.1 5b. Willing to make decision without regard to possible 3.5 outside pressure 3.5 3.0 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 62 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey Average: How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is toward the defense or prosecution? Jackson L. Peters, Jr. 0.2 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Peters, Jr.'s sentences? Jackson L. Peters, Jr. -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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 100% 90% 85% 81% 80% 78% 74% 70% 64% 60% 58% 5500%% 40% 30% 20% 16% 15% 14% 13% 9% 9% 10% 8% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7% 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 3% 3% 2% 2% 0% Including Undecided Excluding Undecided Judge Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 65 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 61% 69% 73% B 18% 19% 18% C 12% 6% 4% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 5% 2% 2% No Grade 1% 2% 1% Average 3.3 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 1 ## Page 66 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating participants politely and with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 64% 72% 76% B 16% 16% 14% C 6% 5% 4% D 5% 2% 2% Fail 8% 4% 3% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.2 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 2 ## Page 67 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Conducting [his/her] courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 53% 70% 74% B 21% 16% 14% C 8% 5% 5% D 6% 2% 2% Fail 10% 4% 3% No Grade 1% 2% 1% Average 3.0 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 3 ## Page 68 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having a sense of compassion and human understanding for those who appear before the judge?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 57% 65% 69% B 18% 18% 17% C 9% 6% 5% D 5% 3% 2% Fail 10% 5% 4% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.1 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 4 ## Page 69 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 63% 72% 75% B 18% 15% 14% C 6% 5% 4% D 4% 2% 2% Fail 9% 4% 3% No Grade 1% 2% 2% Average 3.2 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 5 ## Page 70 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating those involved in the case without bias?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 56% 70% 73% B 18% 15% 14% C 8% 4% 4% D 5% 3% 2% Fail 11% 5% 4% No Grade 2% 3% 3% Average 3.0 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 6 ## Page 71 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating fairly people who represent themselves?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 50% 52% 49% B 15% 11% 9% C 7% 4% 3% D 5% 2% 1% Fail 8% 4% 3% No Grade 15% 27% 35% Average 3.1 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 7 ## Page 72 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving each side enough time to present his or her case?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 57% 69% 72% B 18% 15% 14% C 7% 5% 4% D 5% 2% 2% Fail 7% 3% 3% No Grade 6% 6% 5% Average 3.2 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 8 ## Page 73 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making sure participants understand the proceedings, and what's going on in the courtroom?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 66% 74% 76% B 16% 14% 14% C 9% 6% 5% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 4% 2% 2% No Grade 1% 2% 2% Average 3.4 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 9 ## Page 74 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Using language that everyone can understand?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 67% 74% 76% B 17% 17% 16% C 10% 5% 4% D 3% 1% 1% Fail 2% 1% 1% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.4 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade B+ B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 10 ## Page 75 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear what's being said?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 71% 76% 78% B 17% 15% 14% C 8% 5% 4% D 2% 1% 1% Fail 2% 1% 1% No Grade 1% 1% 1% Average 3.5 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade B+ A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 11 ## Page 76 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 56% 59% 61% B 24% 23% 24% C 11% 9% 8% D 4% 3% 2% Fail 2% 3% 2% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 12 ## Page 77 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 66% 75% 77% B 17% 16% 15% C 10% 5% 4% D 1% 1% 1% Fail 4% 1% 1% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average 3.4 3.6 3.7 Letter Grade B+ B+ A- Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 13 ## Page 78 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 49% 59% 62% B 24% 17% 17% C 8% 6% 5% D 4% 1% 1% Fail 7% 2% 2% No Grade 8% 15% 13% Average 3.1 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 14 ## Page 79 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being prepared for [his/her] cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 58% 67% 71% B 20% 15% 14% C 9% 5% 4% D 5% 2% 1% Fail 5% 3% 2% No Grade 4% 9% 8% Average 3.2 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 15 ## Page 80 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted time?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 56% 64% 66% B 23% 20% 20% C 12% 7% 7% D 4% 2% 2% Fail 5% 3% 2% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.2 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 16 ## Page 81 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 56% 62% 65% B 18% 16% 16% C 13% 7% 5% D 4% 3% 2% Fail 7% 4% 3% No Grade 2% 9% 9% Average 3.2 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 17 ## Page 82 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible outside pressure?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 53% 57% 59% B 19% 12% 12% C 6% 4% 4% D 4% 2% 2% Fail 9% 4% 3% No Grade 10% 21% 20% Average 3.1 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 18 ## Page 83 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 A 54% 64% 66% B 18% 14% 14% C 7% 5% 4% D 8% 3% 3% Fail 10% 4% 4% No Grade 3% 10% 10% Average 3.0 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 19 ## Page 84 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 6% 2% 2% ⇑ 4 6% 2% 1% 3 1% 2% 2% 2 2% 2% 2% 1 6% 5% 5% 0 Neutral 61% 78% 82% -1 7% 3% 3% -2 2% 1% 1% -3 5% 1% 1% -4 2% 1% 1% ⇓ -5 2% 1% 1% Average 0.2 0.1 0.1 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 20 ## Page 85 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Peters, Jr. are? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2008 Judges 2008 5 6% 3% 2% ⇑ 4 2% 2% 2% 3 5% 2% 2% 2 0% 3% 2% 1 5% 3% 3% 0 Appropriate 58% 73% 76% -1 4% 5% 5% -2 7% 3% 4% -3 7% 2% 2% -4 4% 2% 1% ⇓ -5 4% 2% 1% Average -0.2 0.0 0.0 hsraH oT thgiL oT Judicial Performance Survey 2008 Page 21 ## Page 86 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non-Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Peters, Jr. be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2006 Judges 2008 Strongly Recommend 64% 81% 85% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 14% 9% 8% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 7% 3% 2% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 16% 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Responses by Type Total No Undeliverable/ Other Non- Coop Role Type Sent Response Not Applicable Responses Completes Rate Attorneys Criminal District Attorneys 5 5 0 0 0 0.0% Defense Attorneys 7 0 0 0 7 100.0% Other Attorneys Criminal 35 14 1 0 20 58.8% Civil Attorneys for Litigants 11 1 3 0 7 87.5% Other Attorneys Civil 7 4 0 0 3 42.9% Attorneys, Unknown Role Type 13 4 0 0 9 69.2% Total Attorneys 78 28 4 0 46 37.8% Non-attorneys Criminal Law Enforcement 109 71 10 1 27 27.3% Defendant 173 120 31 0 22 15.5% Witness 16 10 6 0 0 0.0% Other 147 77 50 3 17 17.5% Civil Litigant 204 113 42 1 48 29.6% Non-attorneys, Unknown Role Type 110 56 32 1 21 26.9% Total Non-attorneys 759 447 171 6 135 76.0% Others Jurors 63 25 2 0 36 59.0% Total Others 63 25 2 0 36 41.0% Grand Total: 900 500 177 6 217 30.0% 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 JJaacckkssoonn LL.. PPeetteerrss,, JJrr.. ## Page 2 March 22, 2004 The Honorable Jackson L. Peters, Jr. County Judge, 4th Judicial District P.O. Box 2980 Colorado Springs, Co. 80901-2980 Dear Judge Peters, Jr.: 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Average Grades: Overall and by Section 3.5 Overall Average 3.4 3.3 3.6 Q1. Overall Case 3.4 Management 3.3 3.5 Q2. Overall App & 3.3 Knowldge of Law 3.2 3.7 Q3. Overall 3.6 Communications 3.5 3.5 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.4 3.4 3.4 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.3 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Average Grade Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 5 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Average Grades: Case Management 3.6 Q1. Overall Case Management 3.4 3.3 3.6 1a. Promptly making rulings 3.5 during trial 3.5 3.7 1b. Beginning court on time 3.3 3.4 3.4 1c. Allotting appropriate 3.3 amount of time for cases 3.3 3.5 1d. Keeping cases moving 3.4 according to schedule 3.3 3.5 1e. Assisting parties to reach 3.1 agreement 3 3.6 1f. Maintaining appropriate 3.5 control over proceedings 3.4 3.5 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 3.6 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 6 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.5 Q2. Overall App & Knowldge of 3.3 Law 3.2 3.3 2a. Basing decisions on 3.2 evidence and arguments 3.2 3.5 2b. Giving reasons for rulings 3.3 3.3 3.5 2c. Issuing written findings of 3 fact and law 3.1 3.2 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 3.5 2g. Being able to identify and 3.3 analyze relevant facts 3.3 2h. Issuing consistent 3.5 sentences when the 3.3 circumstances are similar 3.2 2i. Willing to make decision 3.5 without regard to possible 3.3 criticism 3.3 3.6 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 7 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Average Grades: Communications 3.8 Q3. Overall Communications 3.6 3.6 3.7 3a. Speaking clearly 3.5 3.5 3.7 3b. Making sure all participants understand the 3.6 proceedings 3.6 3.7 3c. Using understandable 3.6 language 3.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 8 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Average Grades: Demeanor 3.5 Q4. Overall Demeanor 3.4 3.4 3.5 4a. Giving proceedings a 3.5 sense of dignity 3.5 3.5 4b. Treating everyone 3.4 involved politely 3.4 3.5 4c. Having empathy with the 3.2 parties involved 3.2 3.6 4d. Treating participants with 3.4 respect 3.4 3.3 4e. Presenting a neutral 3.3 presence on the bench 3.3 3.3 4f. Being consistent in his/her 3.4 behavior 3.3 4g. Conducting his/her 3.3 courtroom in a neutral 3.3 manner 3.3 3.6 4h. Giving all participants an 3.5 opportunity to be heard 3.4 3.4 4i. Consistently applying laws 3.3 and rules 3.3 3.6 4j. Not engaging in ex parte 3.5 communications 3.6 3.5 4k. Treating pro se parties 3.4 fairly 3.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 9 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Average Grades: Diligence 3.4 Q5. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.2 3.6 5a. Making tough decisions 3.3 when necessary 3.3 3.3 5b. Using good judgment in application of relevant law and 3.2 rules 3.2 3.4 5c. Doing the necessary "homework" and being 3.3 prepared for his/her cases 3.2 5d. Being willing to handle 3.5 cases on the docket even when they are 3.4 complicatedand time consuming 3.3 3.5 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges Average Grade All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 10 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Q6. Average: How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is toward the defense or prosecution? Jackson L. 0.7 Peters, Jr. 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Q7. Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Peters, Jr.'s sentences? Jackson L. 0.9 Peters, Jr. 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 80% 74% 74% 73% 72% 70% 69% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 18% 18% 17% 16% 16% 15% 10% 6%6% 6%6% 5% 5%5% 5% 4%4% 4%4% 3% 3% 3% 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 Peters, Jr. Including Undecided Excluding Undecided All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 13 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Promptly making rulings during trial?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 61% 51% 51% B 22% 22% 24% C 5% 6% 6% D 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 12% 19% 17% Average 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 14 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 76% 53% 54% B 15% 30% 29% C 10% 10% 9% D 3% 3% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 3% 4% Average 3.7 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade A- B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 15 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Allotting appropriate amount of time for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 50% 49% B 24% 31% 30% C 10% 9% 10% D 3% 3% Fail 2% 1% 1% No Grade 5% 6% 6% Average 3.4 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 16 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Keeping cases moving according to schedule?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 61% 52% 50% B 29% 31% 30% C 5% 9% 10% D 2% 3% 4% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 2% 5% 5% Average 3.5 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 17 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Assisting parties to reach agreement?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 39% 21% 25% B 15% 16% 18% C 9% 8% 10% D 3% 4% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 36% 51% 41% Average 3.5 3.1 3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 18 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1f. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 66% 59% 58% B 27% 27% 27% C 5% 8% 8% D 2% 2% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 2% 4% 3% Average 3.6 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 19 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1g. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Promptly ruling on pre-trial motions?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 55% 41% 39% B 15% 21% 24% C 8% 8% 10% D 5% 3% 4% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 18% 27% 21% Average 3.5 3.3 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 20 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1h. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Promptly issuing a decision on the case after trial?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 64% 47% 44% B 21% 20% 21% C 6% 7% D 1% 2% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 15% 25% 24% Average 3.8 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 21 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 1i. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 50% 47% B 29% 29% 30% C 2% 9% 10% D 2% 2% 3% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 7% 9% 8% Average 3.6 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 22 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Basing decisions on evidence and arguments?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 56% 49% 49% B 22% 27% 27% C 15% 11% 10% D 5% 5% 5% Fail 2% 3% No Grade 2% 6% 6% Average 3.3 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 10 ## Page 23 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 51% 51% B 30% 27% 27% C 5% 10% 10% D 5% 4% 5% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 6% 5% Average 3.5 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 11 ## Page 24 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Issuing written findings of fact and law?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 35% 19% 27% B 16% 11% 17% C 8% 9% D 3% 3% Fail 3% 2% 2% No Grade 45% 57% 42% Average 3.5 3 3.1 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 12 ## Page 25 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Willing to reconsider error in fact or law?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 36% 27% 26% B 13% 19% 20% C 8% 11% 11% D 5% 5% 5% Fail 3% 3% 4% No Grade 36% 35% 34% Average 3.2 2.9 2.9 Letter Grade B B- B- Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 13 ## Page 26 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having knowledge of relevant substantive law?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 63% 47% 46% B 28% 30% 31% C 5% 11% 11% D 4% 4% Fail 3% 2% 2% No Grade 3% 6% 5% Average 3.5 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 14 ## Page 27 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having knowledge of rules of procedure and evidence?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 65% 52% 52% B 30% 28% 29% C 3% 9% 9% D 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 51% 51% B 20% 28% 28% C 10% 9% 10% D 4% 4% Fail 3% 2% 2% No Grade 8% 6% 5% Average 3.5 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 16 ## Page 29 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2h. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Issuing consistent sentences when the circumstances are similar?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 30% 38% 27% B 22% 23% 17% C 7% 6% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 46% 28% 46% Average 3.5 3.3 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 17 ## Page 30 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2i. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible criticism?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 47% 47% B 15% 23% 23% C 5% 9% 8% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 3% 3% 2% No Grade 15% 15% 17% Average 3.5 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 18 ## Page 31 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 2j. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making decisions without fear of being appealed?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 49% 48% B 13% 23% 22% C 5% 7% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 3% 2% 2% No Grade 20% 17% 18% Average 3.6 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 19 ## Page 32 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Speaking clearly?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 80% 70% 67% B 18% 21% 23% C 6% 6% D 3% 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making sure all participants understand the proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 75% 66% 64% B 23% 21% 23% C 3% 7% 7% D 2% 2% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 3% 3% Average 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 21 ## Page 34 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Using understandable language?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 78% 69% 67% B 18% 21% 24% C 5% 6% 6% D 1% 1% Fail 0% 0% No Grade 2% 2% Average 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 22 ## Page 35 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 65% 64% 63% B 23% 24% 23% C 13% 7% 7% D 2% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 2% 2% Average 3.5 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 23 ## Page 36 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating everyone involved politely?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 74% 61% 63% B 11% 20% 20% C 11% 9% 8% D 5% 4% 4% Fail 3% 4% No Grade 2% 2% Average 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 24 ## Page 37 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having empathy with the parties involved?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 66% 51% 51% B 16% 24% 24% C 5% 11% 11% D 8% 5% 5% Fail 4% 3% No Grade 5% 5% 6% Average 3.5 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 25 ## Page 38 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating participants with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 72% 62% 62% B 15% 21% 21% C 10% 8% 8% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 2% 2% Average 3.6 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 26 ## Page 39 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Presenting a neutral presence on the bench?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 62% 57% 58% B 21% 23% 23% C 10% 9% 9% D 5% 5% 4% Fail 3% 4% 3% No Grade 2% 3% Average 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 27 ## Page 40 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4f. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being consistent in his/her behavior?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 58% 58% B 23% 22% 23% C 5% 9% 9% D 8% 3% 3% Fail 3% 3% 3% No Grade 3% 4% 4% Average 3.3 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 28 ## Page 41 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4g. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 62% 57% 59% B 18% 23% 23% C 10% 9% 9% D 5% 5% 4% Fail 5% 3% 3% No Grade 3% 3% Average 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 29 ## Page 42 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4h. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving all participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 74% 61% 62% B 18% 24% 23% C 5% 8% 7% D 3% 2% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 3% 3% Average 3.6 3.5 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 30 ## Page 43 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4i. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Consistently applying laws and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 54% 53% B 21% 24% 24% C 15% 10% 10% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% No Grade 3% 6% 6% Average 3.4 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 31 ## Page 44 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4j. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Not engaging in ex parte communications?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 62% 55% 56% B 18% 19% 17% C 3% 4% 4% D 3% 2% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 15% 20% 20% Average 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 32 ## Page 45 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 4k. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating pro se parties fairly?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 63% 51% 45% B 16% 18% 15% C 3% 5% 4% D 3% 2% 1% Fail 3% 3% 2% No Grade 13% 22% 33% Average 3.5 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 33 ## Page 46 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making tough decisions when necessary?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 58% 45% 47% B 23% 26% 25% C 5% 9% 10% D 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 15% 15% 14% Average 3.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 34 ## Page 47 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Using good judgment in application of relevant law and rules?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 53% 48% 48% B 28% 28% 28% C 15% 11% 11% D 3% 5% 5% Fail 3% 3% 3% No Grade 6% 5% Average 3.3 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 35 ## Page 48 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Doing the necessary "homework" and being prepared for his/her cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 54% 47% 47% B 26% 27% 27% C 13% 10% 11% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 2% 3% No Grade 5% 11% 9% Average 3.4 3.3 3.2 Letter Grade B+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 36 ## Page 49 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicatedand time consuming?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 56% 48% 47% B 28% 22% 22% C 8% 8% 8% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 5% 17% 17% Average 3.5 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 37 ## Page 50 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Providing prompt access to the court in emergency matters?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 44% 38% 37% B 13% 16% 16% C 3% 5% 6% D 5% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 36% 37% 37% Average 3.5 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B+ B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 38 ## Page 51 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 4% 3% 4 7% 3% 3% 3 11% 6% 6% 2 11% 13% 12% 1 11% 18% 16% 50% 49% 49% -1 4% 4% 4% -2 4% 2% 2% -3 1% 1% -4 4% 1% 1% -5 0% 1% Average 0.7 0.8 0.7 noitucesorP drawoT esnefeD drawoT Ý 0 Neutral ß Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 39 ## Page 52 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Peters, Jr. are? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 4% 3% 2% 4 4% 3% 2% 3 7% 5% 5% 2 18% 9% 9% 1 4% 13% 12% 64% 59% 58% -1 4% 5% -2 2% 2% -3 2% 2% -4 0% 1% -5 0% 1% Average 0.9 0.5 0.4 hsraH thgiL Ý 0 Appropriate ß Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 40 ## Page 53 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Peters, Jr. be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 Strongly Recommend 74% 73% 74% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 18% 17% 16% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 5% 4% 4% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 3% 6% 6% Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 41 ## Page 54 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Overall and by Section 3.3 Overall Average 3.3 3.3 3.3 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.3 3.3 3.3 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.3 3.3 3.5 Q3. Overall 3.5 Communications 3.5 3.3 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.3 3.1 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 55 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Demeanor 3.3 Q1. Overall Demeanor 3.2 3.3 3.4 1a. Giving proceedings a 3.3 sense of dignity 3.4 3.4 1b. Treating participants 3.3 politely and with respect 3.4 3.1 1c. Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral 3.2 manner 3.3 3.2 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 56 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Fairness 3.3 Q2. Overall Fairness 3.3 3.3 3.5 2a. Giving participants an 3.3 opportunity to be heard 3.4 3.1 2b. Treating those involved 3.2 with the case without bias 3.2 3.3 2c. Treating fairly people who 3.2 represent themselves 3.3 3.4 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 57 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Communications 3.5 Q3. Overall Communications 3.4 3.5 3.5 3a. Making sure all participants understand the 3.4 proceedings 3.4 3.5 3b. Using language that 3.4 everyone can understand 3.5 3.6 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 58 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Diligence 3.3 Q4. Overall Diligence 3.3 3.3 3.2 4a. Beginning court on time 3.2 3.2 3.5 4b. Maintaining appropriate 3.5 control over proceedings 3.5 3.3 4c. Setting reasonable 3.3 schedules for cases 3.3 3.3 4d. Being prepared for his or 3.3 her cases 3.4 3.3 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. All County Judges Average Grade All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 59 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Average Grades: Application and Knowledge of Law 3.1 Q5. Overall App of Law 3.2 3.2 3.2 5a. Giving reasons for rulings 3.2 3.2 3 5b. Willing to make decision without regard to possible 3.2 outside pressure 3.2 3.2 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Average Grade All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 60 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Q6. Average: How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is toward the defense or prosecution? Jackson L. -0.1 Peters, Jr. 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Q7. Average: How lenient or how harsh are Judge Peters, Jr.'s sentences? Jackson L. -0.4 Peters, Jr. 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey Retention Recommendation 80% 74% 72% 71% 70% 67% 65% 64% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 15% 13% 11%11% 11%11% 10%10% 10%10% 10%10% 9% 9% 10% 8% 6%6% 5%5% 5% 4% 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 Peters, Jr. Including Undecided Excluding Undecided All County Judges All Trial Judges Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 63 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving proceedings a sense of dignity?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 60% 58% 60% B 22% 23% 23% C 10% 9% 8% D 4% 4% 3% Fail 2% 3% 3% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.4 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 1 ## Page 64 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating participants politely and with respect?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 65% 61% 63% B 18% 19% 19% C 10% 9% 8% D 5% 5% 4% Fail 2% 4% 4% No Grade 3% 2% Average 3.4 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 2 ## Page 65 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Conducting his/her courtroom in a neutral manner?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 57% 59% 61% B 17% 19% 18% C 11% 9% 8% D 11% 5% 4% Fail 4% 5% 5% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.1 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 3 ## Page 66 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 1d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Having a sense of compassion and human understanding for those who appear before the Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 59% 54% 56% B 16% 20% 20% C 12% 10% 9% D 7% 5% 4% Fail 4% 7% 6% No Grade 1% 4% 4% Average 3.2 3.1 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 4 ## Page 67 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving participants an opportunity to be heard?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 66% 60% 62% B 24% 21% 20% C 5% 7% 7% D 3% 4% 4% Fail 1% 5% 4% No Grade 1% 4% 3% Average 3.5 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 5 ## Page 68 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating those involved in the case without bias?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 57% 58% 60% B 16% 19% 18% C 8% 7% 7% D 9% 5% 4% Fail 7% 7% 7% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average 3.1 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 6 ## Page 69 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Treating fairly people who represent themselves?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 52% 47% 45% B 11% 15% 14% C 6% 6% 5% D 4% 4% 3% Fail 5% 6% 5% No Grade 21% 23% 29% Average 3.3 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 7 ## Page 70 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving each side enough time to present his or her case?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 63% 57% 59% B 18% 20% 19% C 8% 8% 7% D 4% 3% 3% Fail 3% 4% 4% No Grade 4% 8% 7% Average 3.4 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 8 ## Page 71 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Making sure all participants understand the proceedings, and what's going on in the Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 69% 63% 64% B 16% 20% 19% C 8% 8% 8% D 5% 4% 3% Fail 1% 3% 3% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 9 ## Page 72 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Using language that everyone can understand?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 67% 63% 64% B 18% 21% 21% C 11% 8% 8% D 3% 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 3% 3% Average 3.5 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 10 ## Page 73 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Speaking clearly so everyone in the courtroom can hear what's being said?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 71% 66% 66% B 18% 20% 20% C 6% 7% 7% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 11 ## Page 74 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Beginning court on time?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 55% 50% 52% B 26% 25% 25% C 9% 11% 10% D 5% 4% 4% Fail 4% 5% 4% No Grade 1% 5% 5% Average 3.2 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 12 ## Page 75 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Maintaining appropriate control over proceedings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 64% 63% 64% B 24% 22% 21% C 9% 7% 7% D 1% 3% 3% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 1% 3% 3% Average 3.5 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 13 ## Page 76 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 4c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Setting reasonable schedules for cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 52% 48% 51% B 20% 23% 21% C 12% 8% 8% D 1% 3% 3% Fail 3% 3% 3% No Grade 12% 15% 14% Average 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 14 ## Page 77 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 4d. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being prepared for his or her cases?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 58% 56% 58% B 20% 21% 19% C 8% 8% 7% D 7% 3% 3% Fail 1% 3% 4% No Grade 5% 9% 9% Average 3.3 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 15 ## Page 78 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 4e. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Managing court proceedings so that there is little wasted time?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 57% 53% 54% B 25% 25% 24% C 13% 10% 10% D 4% 4% 4% Fail 2% 4% 4% No Grade 5% 5% Average 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 16 ## Page 79 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Giving reasons for rulings?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 58% 52% 54% B 13% 20% 20% C 9% 9% 8% D 5% 4% 4% Fail 7% 6% 5% No Grade 7% 9% 9% Average 3.2 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 17 ## Page 80 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Willing to make decision without regard to possible outside pressure?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 50% 48% 50% B 12% 17% 16% C 6% 7% 7% D 6% 4% 3% Fail 10% 6% 6% No Grade 16% 18% 18% Average 3.0 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 18 ## Page 81 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Peters, Jr. on "Being able to identify and analyze relevant facts?" Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 A 61% 53% 55% B 14% 19% 18% C 5% 8% 7% D 6% 4% 4% Fail 9% 6% 6% No Grade 5% 9% 9% Average 3.2 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 19 ## Page 82 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 6. How biased do you think Judge Peters, Jr. is towards the defense or the prosecution? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 3% 4% 3% 4 5% 3% 2% 3 2% 2% 2% 2 3% 3% 3% 1 5% 6% 6% 62% 68% 70% -1 5% 4% 4% -2 4% 3% 3% -3 4% 3% 2% -4 3% 1% 2% -5 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 7. How lenient or harsh do you think the sentences handed down by Judge Peters, Jr. are? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 5 5% 5% 4% 4 2% 3% 2% 3 2% 3% 3% 2 2% 3% 3% 1 4% 4% 4% 53% 60% 62% -1 4% 6% 7% -2 10% 6% 6% -3 9% 5% 5% -4 3% 2% 2% -5 5% 3% 2% Average -0.4 0.0 -0.1 hsraH thgiL Ý 0 Appropriate ß Judicial Performance Survey 2004 Page 21 ## Page 84 Judge Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Non Attorney Survey 12. Do you recommend that Judge Peters, Jr. be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Peters, Jr. Judges 2004 Judges 2004 Strongly Recommend 71% 72% 74% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend 9% 11% 11% Retain in office Somewhat Recommend Not 6% 6% 5% Retain in office Strongly Recommend Not Retain in office 15% 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 Jackson L. Peters, Jr. Responses by Type Total Other Non- Coop Role Type Sent Completes Refusals Undeliverable Responses Rate District Attorney 5 3 0 0 0 60.0% Attorney For Defendant 36 22 0 3 0 66.7% Guardian ad Litem 4 2 0 0 0 50.0% Unknown Attorney Type 36 14 0 6 0 46.7% Sub Total: 81 41 0 9 0 56.9% Defendant 120 20 3 19 0 19.8% Plaintiff 47 20 0 8 0 51.3% Law Enforcement 65 26 3 5 0 43.3% Employee 18 6 1 1 0 35.3% Juror 116 56 1 6 0 50.9% Victim Other 47 13 1 7 0 32.5% Sub Total: 413 141 9 46 0 38.4% Grand Total: 494 182 9 55 0 41.5% 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

• 2008 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 2004 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 2000 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 1996 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026
• 1992 evaluation on OJPE · scraped Apr 17, 2026