← All judges

Stephan Richard Ruddick

Trial Court · Arapahoe · Arapahoe

Does Not Meet(Do Not Retain)2 cycles on record

Evaluation history

  • 2002 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Arapahoe · Arapahoe
    Does Not Meet(Do Not Retain)
    Reports: 2002 Retention Survey Report Need an accessible PDF Document Version? Please click on the link below and email our staff Contact Us The Eighteenth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Stephen R. Ruddick NOT BE RETAINED. This recommendation was not unanimous. The Commission personally interviewed each judge in the district whose term was nearing completion and who was seeking retention. Further, written evaluations were required from a random sample of attorneys, court employees, law enforcement personnel, jurors, litigants, crime victims and other constituents who have been involved in the proceedings in each judge’s court. Survey results were designed and compiled by an independent agency to provide confidentiality. Judge Ruddick was appointed to the Arapahoe County Court in 1994 and has served as acting District Court Judge in felony, domestic, juvenile and some appellate matters. He has served as a Senator in the Colorado General Assembly. He was an Assistant City Attorney in Aurora prior to assuming his duties as a County Judge. Forty-five percent of non-attorneys and 56% of attorneys responded to the survey on the performance of Judge Ruddick. Of the attorneys responding, 61% said Judge Ruddick should be retained as opposed to a 83% retention rate for all other county judges. Thirty-three percent said he should not be retained and the average of all county judges not being retained was 11%, with 6% having no opinion. Judge Ruddick’s "do not retain" percentage by attorneys was three times the statewide average for other county judges. However, among non-attorneys, the comments about Judge Ruddick were more favorable than not. Eighty-six percent of non-attorneys recommended he be retained in office as opposed to the statewide average for county court judges of 81%. Eight percent responded not to retain versus the statewide average for county judges of 9%. The questionnaires rated the judges on the basis of letter grades. The attorney questionnaires rated Judge Ruddick one letter grade below average on being courteous toward parties, witnesses and pro se parties; in explaining court procedures clearly and thoroughly; in maintaining a professional demeanor in the courtroom; patience and listening skills; managing his docket; being punctual in starting proceedings; using court time efficiently; and providing quick access to the court in emergency matters. The attorneys rated him significantly below average in communicating verbally in a clear, thorough and well-reasoned manner. Non-attorneys scored Judge Ruddick average or above average in all categories. Judge Ruddick appeared before the Commission a second time to discuss the survey results. At the second interview, Judge Ruddick presented a series of letters supporting his judgeship and a corrective action plan he is willing to follow to mitigate the concerns of the Commission. A majority of Commission members did not feel that this corrective action plan was sufficient to overcome its concerns, particularly because he has been on the bench for eight years. It is recommended that Judge Ruddick not be retained as a County Court Judge. JUDGE STEPHEN R. RUDDICK’S RESPONSE Judge Ruddick responded to the Commission's analysis by pointing out that he has a very busy docket, and has been strict in sentencing repeat DUI offenders. He believes the survey reflects negatively because there were no prosecutors surveyed, and the number of attorneys surveyed was small. He submitted a large number of supportive letters from attorneys, citizens and other professionals to the Commission and voluntarily submitted an action plan intended to improve his performance. He also supplemented the Commission's summary of his past and present activities to include references to his being a past president of the Aurora Bar Association, past County Court Presiding Judge, is currently president of the Trial Judges’ Council and is a member of the County Judges Association.
  • 1998 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Arapahoe · Arapahoe
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    Retention Year: 1998 Recommendation: Retain The Eighteenth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends unanimously that Judge Stephen Richard Ruddick BE RETAINED. Judge Ruddick has served as County Court Judge for four years. He was first appointed to the Arapahoe County Court in 1994 and has also served as acting District Court Judge for felony, domestic, juvenile and appellate matters. Prior to accepting appointment to the bench, he was a Senator in the Colorado General Assembly. He also was an assistant city attorney in Aurora from 1981-94 and in general private practice in 1979-80. He earned an undergraduate degree in history and political science from Metropolitan State College in Denver (1977) and his law degree from the University of Denver (1980). Judge Ruddick received the retention support of 87.5% of practicing attorneys. Only 12.5% recommended against retention. 98.1% of non-lawyers (litigants, jurors, court and law enforcement personnel) recommended retention. He received high praise for his courtroom demeanor and control in managing his docket where cases "were dealt with in a reasonable time frame" and "his decisions are well-supported by the facts or circumstances of each case." Judge Ruddick's self-evaluation demonstrates a willingness to constantly seek improvement. Judge Ruddick wrote (and distributes to each citizen appearing in his court), a free, helpful, informative brochure which explains in clear, simple language a person's legal rights and obligations and general court procedures. For those representing themselves, it explains why neither the Judge nor his staff can provide legal advice about an individual case, but it provides a helpful glossary of legal terms and describes how a trial progresses. He also gives Aurora Bar Association members a list of local practice tips to save their clients' time. Judge Ruddick describes his "People's Court" as "one of limited jurisdiction with a voluminous caseload."

Surveys & reports

  • 2002 cycle
    • 2002 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
      Read full retention survey textexpand
      ## Page 1 March 6, 2002 The Honorable Stephen R. Ruddick 15400 E. 14th Place, #201 Aurora, CO 80011 Dear Judge Ruddick: Every two years the Colorado Judicial Performance Commission conducts a survey of people who have been in the courtroom of judges who face a retention vote in the next general election. The 2002 survey was conducted by Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc., who attempted to contact over 55,000 people who had been in these courtrooms in one capacity or another. Over 18,000 people responded—3,686 to the attorney survey and 14,925 to the non-attorney survey. This report contains the results of those who were in your courtroom and who responded to the survey. In addition to this introduction, the report is divided into four main sections: • Results: This section contains the average and percentage distribution of responses to each substantive numerical question in the survey. It is divided into two subsections, one for the results of the attorney survey and one for the results of the non-attorney survey. • Comments: Respondents were also asked to comment about each judge on each section of the questionnaire: courtesy, impartiality, communications skills, judicial temperament, diligence, application of the law, retention and general comments. These comments have been transcribed, and in some instances redacted to eliminate respondent identifying information. Again this section has been divided into two subsections, one for attorney comments and one for non-attorney comments. • Methodology: The fourth section of the report discusses the methodology of the survey. • Questionnaires: And the final section provides copies of the questionnaires that were used. 100 Arap ahoe, Suite One, Boulder, CO 80302 Phone 303.443.5300 Fax 303.447.9386 ## Page 2 March 6, 2002 The Honorable Stephen R. Ruddick Page 2 If you have any questions about the methodology and how the survey was conducted, please feel free to contact me at 303-443-5300, and for any other questions you might have about the survey please call the Director of the Colorado Judicial Performance Program, Michelle Stermer, at 303-837-3665. Best regards, Paul A. Talmey President enc: ## Page 3 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being courteous toward parties or witnesses? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 22% 64% 65% B 39% 22% 21% C 6% 7% 7% D 17% 3% 3% Fail 17% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 3% Average Grade 2.3 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade C B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 1 ## Page 4 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being courteous toward attorneys? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 64% 61% B 33% 20% 22% C 6% 7% 8% D 4% 4% Fail 17% 3% 3% No Grade 2% 3% Average Grade 2.9 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 2 ## Page 5 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being courteous toward pro se parties? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 11% 55% 48% B 22% 17% 14% C 17% 8% 6% D 17% 2% 2% Fail 22% 2% 2% No Grade 11% 16% 29% Average Grade 1.8 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade C- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 3 ## Page 6 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of race? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 67% 63% B 17% 15% 12% C 11% 4% 3% D 11% 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 22% 12% 19% Average Grade 3.1 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade B A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 4 ## Page 7 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of gender? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 69% 66% B 22% 16% 14% C 11% 5% 5% D 6% 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 17% 8% 12% Average Grade 3.3 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 5 ## Page 8 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of age? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 70% 66% B 17% 14% 13% C 11% 5% 4% D 6% 1% 1% Fail 1% No Grade 22% 10% 15% Average Grade 3.3 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade B A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 6 ## Page 9 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of social/economic status? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 66% 65% B 11% 15% 13% C 11% 6% 5% D 6% 3% 2% Fail 11% 2% 2% No Grade 17% 10% 13% Average Grade 2.9 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 7 ## Page 10 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being fair and impartial toward both sides? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 50% 60% 60% B 11% 18% 17% C 6% 9% 8% D 22% 6% 5% Fail 11% 3% 4% No Grade 4% 5% Average Grade 2.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 8 ## Page 11 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating pro se parties fairly? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 58% 51% B 14% 11% C 6% 6% 4% D 11% 2% 1% Fail 22% 2% 1% No Grade 17% 19% 31% Average Grade 2.4 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade C+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 9 ## Page 12 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on not engaging in ex parte communications? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 56% 59% B 17% 15% 12% C 6% 6% 4% D 2% 1% Fail 3% 2% No Grade 33% 18% 21% Average Grade 3.6 3.4 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 10 ## Page 13 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on providing written communications that are clear, thorough, and well reasoned? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 28% 29% 37% B 6% 22% 23% C 8% 9% D 6% 3% 2% Fail 11% 2% 2% No Grade 50% 37% 27% Average Grade 2.7 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 11 ## Page 14 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on communicating verbally in a clear, thorough, and well reasoned manner? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 28% 51% 54% B 22% 30% 28% C 10% 9% D 17% 4% 4% Fail 28% 2% 2% No Grade 6% 3% 3% Average Grade 2.1 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade C B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 12 ## Page 15 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on explaining court procedures clearly and thoroughly? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 53% 54% B 11% 27% 26% C 6% 10% 9% D 11% 3% 3% Fail 22% 2% 2% No Grade 11% 6% 7% Average Grade 2.4 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade C+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 13 ## Page 16 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on maintaining a professional demeanor in the courtroom? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 62% 64% B 17% 21% 21% C 17% 7% 7% D 6% 5% 4% Fail 17% 2% 3% No Grade 6% 2% 3% Average Grade 2.6 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade C+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 14 ## Page 17 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on listening patiently to all testimony and arguments before issuing a ruling? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 33% 57% 57% B 33% 22% 22% C 6% 9% 8% D 5% 5% Fail 28% 3% 4% No Grade 3% 4% Average Grade 2.4 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade C+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 15 ## Page 18 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on managing cases and docket efficiently and with minimal delay? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 28% 47% 46% B 17% 27% 27% C 11% 11% 11% D 11% 4% 4% Fail 22% 3% 4% No Grade 11% 8% 8% Average Grade 2.2 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade C B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 16 ## Page 19 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being punctual in commencing proceedings? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 51% 54% B 17% 27% 28% C 11% 11% 9% D 6% 3% 2% Fail 28% 3% 2% No Grade 4% 4% Average Grade 2.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade C B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 17 ## Page 20 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on using court time efficiently? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 53% 54% B 22% 24% 25% C 11% 10% D 6% 4% 3% Fail 28% 3% 3% No Grade 6% 5% 5% Average Grade 2.4 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade C+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 18 ## Page 21 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being prepared for all court matters? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 44% 56% 58% B 17% 25% 23% C 6% 8% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 17% 2% 2% No Grade 17% 7% 7% Average Grade 2.9 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 19 ## Page 22 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 48% 49% B 6% 18% 18% C 6% 7% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 11% 3% 3% No Grade 39% 21% 21% Average Grade 3.0 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 20 ## Page 23 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 5f. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on providing quick access to the court in emergency matters? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 11% 35% 33% B 11% 14% 13% C 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 17% 2% 2% No Grade 61% 43% 45% Average Grade 2.0 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade C B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 21 ## Page 24 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 6a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on having knowledge of the rules of evidence and procedure? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 33% 47% 53% B 6% 28% 25% C 17% 12% 9% D 11% 4% 3% Fail 11% 3% 2% No Grade 22% 7% 7% Average Grade 2.5 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade C+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 22 ## Page 25 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 6b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on ruling on motions in a timely matter? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 48% 49% B 22% 24% 25% C 6% 8% 8% D 3% 3% Fail 6% 2% 3% No Grade 28% 16% 13% Average Grade 3.2 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 23 ## Page 26 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 6c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on making the correct decision based upon the law and the facts? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 40% 44% B 22% 30% 29% C 11% 13% 12% D 6% 6% 5% Fail 11% 4% 4% No Grade 11% 6% 6% Average Grade 2.8 3.0 3.1 Letter Grade B- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 24 ## Page 27 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 6d. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on making decisions without regard to possible criticism? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 56% 49% 50% B 6% 21% 20% C 9% 8% D 6% 4% 3% Fail 11% 4% 3% No Grade 22% 14% 15% Average Grade 3.1 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 25 ## Page 28 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Attorney Survey 7. Do you recommend that Judge Ruddick be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 Retain in office 61% 83% 84% Do not retain in office 33% 11% 11% No opinion 6% 6% 5% Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 26 ## Page 29 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being courteous toward everyone in the courtroom? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 73% 65% 67% B 14% 20% 19% C 3% 7% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 5% 3% 2% No Grade 4% 4% 4% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 1 ## Page 30 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being courteous toward persons representing themselves? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 41% 49% 47% B 12% 16% 15% C 1% 6% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 6% 3% 2% No Grade 38% 24% 30% Average Grade 3.3 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 2 ## Page 31 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of race? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 68% 63% 65% B 12% 15% 14% C 2% 4% 4% D 2% 1% 1% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 14% 15% 14% Average Grade 3.7 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 3 ## Page 32 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of gender? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 72% 65% 67% B 13% 16% 16% C 2% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 2% No Grade 9% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.7 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 4 ## Page 33 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of age? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 70% 64% 67% B 16% 16% 16% C 1% 6% 5% D 3% 2% 1% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 8% 10% 10% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 5 ## Page 34 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties equally regardless of social/economic status? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 72% 64% 66% B 14% 16% 15% C 1% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% 3% No Grade 8% 10% 9% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 6 ## Page 35 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being fair and impartial toward both sides? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 74% 63% 65% B 12% 16% 16% C 3% 6% 5% D 1% 3% 2% Fail 4% 4% 4% No Grade 7% 8% 7% Average Grade 3.6 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 7 ## Page 36 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on treating parties without attorneys fairly? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 30% 45% 43% B 9% 13% 12% C 2% 5% 4% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 6% 4% 3% No Grade 51% 31% 37% Average Grade 3.2 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 8 ## Page 37 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on giving each side enough time to present his or her case? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 72% 60% 63% B 14% 16% 16% C 3% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% 3% No Grade 7% 14% 11% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 9 ## Page 38 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on speaking in a way that is clearly understood? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 74% 68% 70% B 16% 20% 19% C 4% 6% 6% D 3% 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% 1% No Grade 2% 2% 2% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 10 ## Page 39 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on explaining court procedures clearly and thoroughly? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 74% 67% 69% B 14% 19% 18% C 8% 6% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 2% 4% 4% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 11 ## Page 40 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on maintaining a professional demeanor in the courtroom? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 78% 69% 72% B 11% 17% 16% C 3% 6% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% 2% No Grade 3% 3% 3% Average Grade 3.7 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 12 ## Page 41 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on listening patiently to all testimony and arguments before issuing a ruling? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 71% 64% 66% B 14% 18% 17% C 3% 6% 5% D 2% 3% 2% Fail 5% 4% 3% No Grade 5% 6% 6% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 13 ## Page 42 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on managing cases efficiently and with minimal delay? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 61% 55% 56% B 20% 23% 22% C 6% 9% 8% D 1% 2% 3% Fail 1% 3% 2% No Grade 12% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.6 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 14 ## Page 43 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on starting court on time? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 68% 55% 57% B 15% 23% 23% C 9% 9% 9% D 1% 3% 3% Fail 1% 3% 2% No Grade 5% 6% 6% Average Grade 3.6 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 15 ## Page 44 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on being prepared for cases? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 69% 61% 64% B 17% 19% 18% C 3% 7% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 9% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.7 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 16 ## Page 45 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 6a. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on considering all information presented when making a decision? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 66% 60% 62% B 12% 17% 16% C 2% 6% 5% D 3% 3% 2% Fail 2% 4% 4% No Grade 15% 10% 11% Average Grade 3.6 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 17 ## Page 46 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 6b. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on having knowledge of the rules of evidence, procedure and the law? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 71% 64% 67% B 15% 17% 16% C 1% 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 11% 10% 10% Average Grade 3.7 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 18 ## Page 47 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 6c. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on deciding important matters in a timely way? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 64% 60% 62% B 15% 19% 18% C 4% 6% 6% D 2% 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% 2% No Grade 15% 11% 10% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 19 ## Page 48 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 6d. How would you grade Judge Ruddick on making decisions without regard to public criticism? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 54% 53% 55% B 11% 15% 14% C 2% 5% 5% D 1% 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% 3% No Grade 28% 21% 22% Average Grade 3.6 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 20 ## Page 49 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Non-Attorney Survey 7. Do you recommend that Judge Ruddick be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Ruddick Judges 2002 Judges 2002 Retain in office 86% 81% 83% Do not retain in office 8% 9% 8% No opinion 6% 11% 9% Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18 Page 21 ## Page 50 MMeetthhooddoollooggyy Sample: The Colorado Judicial Department provided Talmey-Drake Research & Strategy, Inc. with a list of cases heard and closed during the two years prior to the summer of 2001 by the 115 justices and judges standing for retention in November 2002. From this list of cases, Talmey-Drake Research drew a sample of the 250 cases most recently closed for each judge or justice. In some instances where there were an insufficient number of cases (or participants in cases), the time period during which cases could be drawn was lengthened. For each case selected a list of people associated with the case who had likely appeared in the judge’s courtroom were drawn from the Judicial Department’s database, ICON, and the Colorado District Attorney’s database (Blackstone system). The cases and the associated case participants were divided up among the 22 judicial districts and put on CD ROM. These CD’s were distributed to the judicial districts, and district personnel added the names of people who were associated with a case, but whose names and addresses had not been captured electronically. The data from the judicial districts were then returned to Talmey-Drake Research where the data was combined and cleaned. Included in the data cleaning was the identification of potential respondents in the sample who had appeared in more than two judges’ courtrooms. Due to concerns about respondent fatigue, no more than two questionnaires were intended to be sent to any one respondent—though there were a few instances where one respondent did receive more than two questionnaires. Where a person had been in more than two judges’ courtrooms, the selection criteria for which judges he or she would be sent questionnaires was: first, for the judge in whose courtroom the potential respondent had been in most often, and two, the judge with the smallest sample of the judges in whose courtroom the potential respondent had been in. Added to this database were a database of jurors and one of court employees. Survey: In November 2002, each person in the database was mailed a postcard saying they would receive a questionnaire concerning judicial performance and that it was important for them to fill it out and return it. Shortly thereafter, they were sent an initial questionnaire and an introductory letter with a postage- paid return envelope. Those who did not respond to the first questionnaire were then sent a sent a second questionnaire and letter. Non-respondents to the second survey were sent a reminder postcard. At this point, non- responders who had been sent questionnaires about judges who had not yet achieved a target cooperation rate of 40% were sent a third letter and questionnaire—and a follow up postcard. During this process, the sample was augmented for judges with a particularly low number of completed questionnaires. 1 ## Page 51 Questionnaire:The questionnaire used in the 2002 Judicial Performance Survey is identical to the questionnaire used for the 2000 survey. Respondents were asked to use a grade of A, B, C, D, or F (Fail) to assess the justice’s or judge’s performance in the areas of Courtesy, Impartiality, Communication, Judicial Temperament, Diligence and Application of the Law. These scores were then converted to a numerical value where A = 4, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and Fail = 0. Response: The response rate is calculated as the number of completed questionnaires divided by the number of eligible respondents who actually received a questionnaire. The following table shows the total number of questionnaires mailed, completed, non-responses & refusals, undeliverables and other responses. The table presents the overall response rate as well as the response rate by the different types of respondents. Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Attorney Respondents Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate District Attorney 852 511 227 42 72 69.2% Attorney For Defendant 3,277 1,921 809 223 324 70.4% Attorney for Plaintiff 1,711 1,001 428 92 190 70.0% Guardian ad Litem 85 47 22 9 7 68.1% Unknown Attorney Type 460 206 112 102 40 64.8% Attorney Total 6,385 3,686 1,598 468 633 69.8% Refused/ Nonre- Unde- Response Non-Attny Respondents Total Sent Completed sponse livered Other Rate Law Enforcement 6,918 2,517 2,648 577 1,176 48.7% Social Services Casewrkr 117 61 36 15 5 62.9% Employee 1,946 1,142 526 105 173 68.5% Defendant 15,701 2,467 7,511 5,109 614 24.7% Plaintiff 3,276 943 1,538 553 242 38.0% Juror 12,910 6,565 4,443 776 1,126 59.6% Victim 3,158 414 1,601 788 355 20.5% Other 4,611 816 2,288 951 556 26.3% Non-attorney Total 48,637 14,925 20,591 8,874 4,247 42.0% Total 55,022 18,611 22,189 9,342 4,880 45.6% A similar table showing the response count and cooperation rate for your survey is provided at the end of this methodology section. 2 ## Page 52 Results: The results of the Survey are in two main sections: Results and Comments. Within each main section are two subsections, one for each general type of respondent, attorney or non-attorney. Results: This section shows the percentage distribution of grades you received on each of the substantive questions plus the retain/do not retain question. An average grade point for each graded question is computed and shown in the results section. A letter grade is also assigned to each grade point according to the following scale. A = 4.00 B = 3.00 to 3.33 C = 2.00 to 2.33 D = 1.00 to 1.33 A— = 3.68 to 3.99 B— = 2.67 to 2.99 C— = 1.67 to 1.99 D— = 0.67 to 0.99 B+ = 3.34 to 3.66 C+ = 2.34 to 2.66 D+ = 1.34 to 1.66 Fail = 0.00 to 0.67 This section also includes two comparative columns of results: one comparative column shows the results for that question for all county or district judges (as appropriate) surveyed in 2002, along with a second comparative column showing the results for all trial judges in the 2002 survey. Comments: Each respondent was encouraged to comment on the judge’s performance in the six areas of Courtesy, Impartiality, Communication, Judicial temperament, Diligence, Application of the law as well as the judge’s Overall performance. This section contains these comments—again divided between results from attorneys and non-attorneys. Sampling All sample surveys are subject to what is known as sampling error—the Error: extent to which the results of the sample survey may differ from what would be obtained if the entire population being surveyed had been interviewed. The size of the sampling error is almost entirely due to the number of people interviewed for the survey and the variance of responses. The table below shows the extent of sampling error (95%-confidence interval) for various sizes of random samples and sample percentage results. Sample Size 25 50 100 150 200 300 Percentages near 10% or 90% ± 11.8% ± 8.3% ± 5.9% ± 4.8% ± 4.2% ± 3.4% Percentages near 20% or 80% ± 15.7% ± 11.1% ± 7.8% ± 6.4% ± 5.5% ± 4.5% Percentages near 30% or 70% ± 18.0% ± 12.7% ± 9.0% ± 7.3% ± 6.4% ± 5.2% Percentages near 40% or 60% ± 19.2% ± 13.6% ± 9.6% ± 7.8% ± 6.8% ± 5.5% Percentages near 50% ± 19.6% ± 13.9% ± 9.8% ± 8.0% ± 6.9% ± 5.7% For example, suppose a reported percentage is 80% in a sample size of 150, then one could expect that 95% of the time that a random sample of the same size and collected the same way would include the true population percentage within the range of 80% plus or minus 6.4%. Averages such as grade points also have a 95% confidence interval, however it is not so easily displayed in a table as confidence intervals about a percentage. Suffice it to say that the confidence interval about a score generally increases with smaller sample size. 3 ## Page 53 Judge Stephen R. Ruddick Survey Disposition Report Total Refusals & Undeliv- Other Response Sent Completes Nonresponse erables Response Rate District Attorney Attorney For Defendant 33 17 14 1 1 54.8% Attorney for Plaintiff 1 1 100.0% Guardian ad Litem Unknown Attorney Type Sub Total: 34 18 14 1 1 56.3% Law Enforcement 5 2 1 2 Social Services Caseworker Employee Defendant 173 26 85 62 23.4% Plaintiff 16 3 10 1 2 23.1% Juror 358 181 139 25 13 56.6% Victim 4 1 2 1 Other 35 2 22 7 4 8.3% Sub Total: 591 212 259 98 22 45.0% Total: 625 230 273 99 23 45.7% 1. 'Other Response' predominately includes people who sent back a survey saying they did not appear in the courtroom, and people who are deceased, or otherwise incapable of responding, and people who could not recall the experience. 2. The Response Rate is calculated using the following formula: Completes (Total Sent - Undeliverables - Other Responses) Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 18

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