← All judges

Larry Everett Vickers

Trial Court · Hinsdale · Hinsdale

Meets Standards(Retain)4 cycles on record

Evaluation history

  • 2002 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Hinsdale · Hinsdale
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    Retention Year: 2002 Recommendation: 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 Seventh Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Larry E. Vickers BE RETAINED. The position of Hinsdale County Court judge is part-time. Judge Vickers, a lay judge (non-attorney), obtained a Bachelor and Masters degrees from Western State College. He was appointed Hinsdale County Court Judge in January of 1978. Prior to becoming a county court judge, he taught school in California and Colorado. Judge Vickers’ workload consists of traffic cases, a small number of criminal proceedings and civil actions, totaling approximately 100 cases per year. The public approves of Judge Vickers performance. Judge Vickers manages his docket in a courteous and informal manner, and is readily available. He acknowledges a bias in favor of law enforcement witnesses but strives to remain impartial. Judge Vickers stated that his strengths are knowing how to find the law and interpret it. He sees himself as a good person who tries hard, who treats people equally and with fairness. Judge Vickers described his weaknesses as his lack of legal training and feels that he is not a very good communicator. One of Judge Vickers’ goals for the year is to continue to be prepared. Judge Vickers believes community service activities are important. In addition to his work on the bench, he takes an active role in the Lake City and Hinsdale County communities. He is a member of the board of directors of a local bank and operates a dude ranch and a guide and outfitting service. The Commission conducted public hearings, interviews with attorneys and non-attorneys, a personal interview and reviewed Judge Vickers’ self-evaluation. Seventy-five percent of a small sampling of attorneys responding to the evaluation recommended that Judge Vickers be retained in office. Of the non-attorneys, 83% recommended retention. The Commission was satisfied with Judge Vickers’ performance. The Commission recommends that Judge Vickers be retained.
  • 1998 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Hinsdale · Hinsdale
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    Retention Year: 1998 Recommendation: Retain The Seventh Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends that Judge Larry E. Vickers BE RETAINED. Judge Vickers was appointed county judge for Hinsdale County in 1978 and has served continuously since then. Prior to his appointment, he taught school. He has a B.A. in business and an M.A. in education from Western State College. He is one of two non-lawyer judges in the Seventh District. He hears approximately 100 cases a year with a disproportionate number being heard during the summer months when visitors swell the population. The caseload is apportioned 90% criminal and 10% civil. Judge Vickers keeps abreast of changes in the law by attending all judicial conferences and by doing recommended reading. He adheres to no set rules for sentencing but handles each case on its individual merit. His evaluations came only from court/probation employees, who commented positively on his politeness and professionalism, but less positively on adhering to rules of evidence and legal precedent, which can result in leniency in sentencing. He received a 75% retention rating. The Judicial Performance Commission unanimously recommends that Judge Vickers be retained.
  • 1994 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Hinsdale · Hinsdale
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    Retention Year: 1994 Recommendation: Retain Judge Larry Vickers was appointed as County Judge of Hinsdale County in 1978. He is a lay judge. The majority of his cases are relative to traffic matters; he hears a small number of misdemeanor cases and very few civil cases. Since the court is in a very small county, the number of response to the evaluation questionnaires sent to attorney, courthouse personnel, litigants and law enforcement members was negligible. Judge Vickers feels he serves the needs of this county in a satisfactory manner and the few responses seemed to agree with that assessment. Serving as a county judge is satisfying for the judge. He uses a friendly, casual manner with those who come before him since for many it is their first encounter with the court system. He feels it is important that they understand the process and fell less intimidated by it. Since the caseload in Hinsdale County is light, it is possible for Judge Vickers to take plenty of time with persons in the court. He is a 20% part-time judge. As a member of a very small community, the judge is active in various areas of community life. He serves as director of the local bank, he served as an elder in his church, been active in the Chamber of Commerce and had other non-political involvements. Judge Vickers would like to serve another term; the 7th Judicial District Commission recommends he should BE RETAINED.
  • 1990 retention cycle
    Trial Court · Hinsdale · Hinsdale
    Meets Standards(Retain)
    Retention Year: 1990 Recommendation: Retain Judicial Performance Commission’s recommendation: Should Be Retained. Judge Vickers, 43, who has been the Hinsdale County judge for the past 12 years, is one of two non-lawyer judge now serving in the 7th Judicial District. Vickers received a master’s degree from Western State College in Gunnison in 1971 and worked as a public school teacher for eight years prior to sitting on the bench. He owns and operates a dude ranch. Vickers is involved with the Hindsdale County Chamber of Commerce, fire department, church and community corrections. The judge handles traffic cases, preliminary hearings in criminal cases, and civil cases in which the claims do not exceed $5,000. He is a 20% part-time judge, and averages only 60 cases per year, or about five per month although, in reality, most of his court work is concentrated during the tourist and hunting seasons. Yet, because many of his cases involve nonresidents, Judge Vickers says he maintains a flexible schedule, arranging court sessions at a moment’s notice when needed. In 12 years, Vickers has not had a jury trial. Of those surveyed, only one suggested non-retention. All others were satisfied with his performance or could not make a recommendation for lack of contact with the Hinsdale County Court. Because of the limited exposure of his court, few responses to the questionnaires were received. The response of the community and his reputation in general are both favorable.

Surveys & reports

  • 2002 cycle
    • 2002 Retention Survey Report(PDF on OJPE)
      Read full retention survey textexpand
      ## Page 1 March 4, 2002 The Honorable Larry E. Vickers P.O. Box 245 317 Henson Lake City, CO 81235 Dear Judge Vickers: 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 4, 2002 The Honorable Larry E. Vickers 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 Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being courteous toward parties or witnesses? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 88% 64% 65% B 22% 21% C 13% 7% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 2% 3% Average Grade 3.8 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 1 ## Page 4 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being courteous toward attorneys? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 88% 64% 61% B 20% 22% C 7% 8% D 4% 4% Fail 13% 3% 3% No Grade 2% 3% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 2 ## Page 5 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 1c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being courteous toward pro se parties? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 50% 55% 48% B 13% 17% 14% C 8% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 38% 16% 29% Average Grade 3.8 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 3 ## Page 6 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of race? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 25% 67% 63% B 15% 12% C 4% 3% D 1% 1% Fail 1% 1% No Grade 75% 12% 19% Average Grade 4.0 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 4 ## Page 7 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of gender? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 50% 69% 66% B 13% 16% 14% C 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 1% 2% No Grade 38% 8% 12% Average Grade 3.8 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 5 ## Page 8 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of age? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 63% 70% 66% B 13% 14% 13% C 5% 4% D 1% 1% Fail 1% No Grade 25% 10% 15% Average Grade 3.8 3.7 3.7 Letter Grade A- A- A- Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 6 ## Page 9 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of social/economic status? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 75% 66% 65% B 15% 13% C 6% 5% D 3% 2% Fail 13% 2% 2% No Grade 13% 10% 13% Average Grade 3.4 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 7 ## Page 10 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being fair and impartial toward both sides? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 63% 60% 60% B 18% 17% C 13% 9% 8% D 6% 5% Fail 13% 3% 4% No Grade 13% 4% 5% Average Grade 3.1 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 8 ## Page 11 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating pro se parties fairly? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 38% 58% 51% B 14% 11% C 6% 4% D 2% 1% Fail 13% 2% 1% No Grade 50% 19% 31% Average Grade 3.0 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 9 ## Page 12 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Vickers on not engaging in ex parte communications? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 25% 56% 59% B 15% 12% C 6% 4% D 2% 1% Fail 25% 3% 2% No Grade 50% 18% 21% Average Grade 2.0 3.4 3.6 Letter Grade C B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 10 ## Page 13 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on providing written communications that are clear, thorough, and well reasoned? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 25% 29% 37% B 38% 22% 23% C 8% 9% D 3% 2% Fail 13% 2% 2% No Grade 25% 37% 27% Average Grade 2.8 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade B- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 11 ## Page 14 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on communicating verbally in a clear, thorough, and well reasoned manner? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 38% 51% 54% B 38% 30% 28% C 10% 9% D 4% 4% Fail 25% 2% 2% No Grade 3% 3% Average Grade 2.6 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade C+ B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 12 ## Page 15 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 3c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on explaining court procedures clearly and thoroughly? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 38% 53% 54% B 13% 27% 26% C 13% 10% 9% D 3% 3% Fail 25% 2% 2% No Grade 13% 6% 7% Average Grade 2.4 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade C+ B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 13 ## Page 16 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on maintaining a professional demeanor in the courtroom? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 75% 62% 64% B 25% 21% 21% C 7% 7% D 5% 4% Fail 2% 3% No Grade 2% 3% Average Grade 3.8 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 14 ## Page 17 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on listening patiently to all testimony and arguments before issuing a ruling? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 75% 57% 57% B 22% 22% C 9% 8% D 25% 5% 5% Fail 3% 4% No Grade 3% 4% Average Grade 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 15 ## Page 18 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on managing cases and docket efficiently and with minimal delay? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 63% 47% 46% B 27% 27% C 11% 11% D 4% 4% Fail 3% 4% No Grade 38% 8% 8% Average Grade 4.0 3.2 3.2 Letter Grade A B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 16 ## Page 19 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being punctual in commencing proceedings? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 63% 51% 54% B 13% 27% 28% C 11% 9% D 3% 2% Fail 13% 3% 2% No Grade 13% 4% 4% Average Grade 3.3 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 17 ## Page 20 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on using court time efficiently? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 63% 53% 54% B 24% 25% C 13% 11% 10% D 4% 3% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 25% 5% 5% Average Grade 3.7 3.3 3.3 Letter Grade A- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 18 ## Page 21 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 5d. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being prepared for all court matters? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 38% 56% 58% B 38% 25% 23% C 13% 8% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 13% 2% 2% No Grade 7% 7% Average Grade 2.9 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 19 ## Page 22 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 5e. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 13% 48% 49% B 18% 18% C 7% 7% D 3% 3% Fail 13% 3% 3% No Grade 75% 21% 21% Average Grade 2.0 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade C B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 20 ## Page 23 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 5f. How would you grade Judge Vickers on providing quick access to the court in emergency matters? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 35% 33% B 14% 13% C 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 13% 2% 2% No Grade 88% 43% 45% Average Grade 0.0 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade F B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 21 ## Page 24 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 6a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on having knowledge of the rules of evidence and procedure? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 13% 47% 53% B 13% 28% 25% C 13% 12% 9% D 13% 4% 3% Fail 25% 3% 2% No Grade 25% 7% 7% Average Grade 1.7 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade C- B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 22 ## Page 25 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 6b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on ruling on motions in a timely matter? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 38% 48% 49% B 24% 25% C 13% 8% 8% D 3% 3% Fail 13% 2% 3% No Grade 38% 16% 13% Average Grade 2.8 3.4 3.3 Letter Grade B- B+ B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 23 ## Page 26 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 6c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on making the correct decision based upon the law and the facts? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 38% 40% 44% B 13% 30% 29% C 13% 13% 12% D 13% 6% 5% Fail 25% 4% 4% No Grade 6% 6% Average Grade 2.3 3.0 3.1 Letter Grade C B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 24 ## Page 27 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 6d. How would you grade Judge Vickers on making decisions without regard to possible criticism? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 50% 49% 50% B 38% 21% 20% C 9% 8% D 4% 3% Fail 13% 4% 3% No Grade 14% 15% Average Grade 3.1 3.2 3.3 Letter Grade B B B Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 25 ## Page 28 Judge Larry E. Vickers Attorney Survey 7. Do you recommend that Judge Vickers be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 Retain in office 75% 83% 84% Do not retain in office 25% 11% 11% No opinion 6% 5% Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 26 ## Page 29 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 1a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being courteous toward everyone in the courtroom? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 70% 65% 67% B 22% 20% 19% C 7% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 4% 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 7 Page 1 ## Page 30 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 1b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being courteous toward persons representing themselves? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 52% 49% 47% B 22% 16% 15% C 4% 6% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 4% 3% 2% No Grade 17% 24% 30% Average Grade 3.4 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 2 ## Page 31 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 2a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of race? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 57% 63% 65% B 9% 15% 14% C 4% 4% D 1% 1% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 35% 15% 14% Average Grade 3.9 3.6 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 3 ## Page 32 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 2b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of gender? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 61% 65% 67% B 13% 16% 16% C 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 26% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.8 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 4 ## Page 33 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 2c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of age? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 57% 64% 67% B 13% 16% 16% C 4% 6% 5% D 2% 1% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 26% 10% 10% Average Grade 3.7 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 5 ## Page 34 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 2d. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties equally regardless of social/economic status? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 57% 64% 66% B 9% 16% 15% C 9% 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 3% 3% No Grade 26% 10% 9% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 6 ## Page 35 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 2e. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being fair and impartial toward both sides? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 65% 63% 65% B 9% 16% 16% C 4% 6% 5% D 3% 2% Fail 9% 4% 4% No Grade 13% 8% 7% Average Grade 3.4 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 7 ## Page 36 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 2f. How would you grade Judge Vickers on treating parties without attorneys fairly? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 57% 45% 43% B 13% 13% 12% C 5% 4% D 2% 2% Fail 9% 4% 3% No Grade 22% 31% 37% Average Grade 3.4 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 8 ## Page 37 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 2g. How would you grade Judge Vickers on giving each side enough time to present his or her case? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 39% 60% 63% B 13% 16% 16% C 5% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 4% 3% 3% No Grade 43% 14% 11% Average Grade 3.5 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 9 ## Page 38 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 3a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on speaking in a way that is clearly understood? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 78% 68% 70% B 17% 20% 19% C 6% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 2% 1% No Grade 4% 2% 2% Average Grade 3.8 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 10 ## Page 39 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 3b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on explaining court procedures clearly and thoroughly? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 65% 67% 69% B 17% 19% 18% C 4% 6% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 4% 2% 2% No Grade 9% 4% 4% Average Grade 3.5 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 11 ## Page 40 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 4a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on maintaining a professional demeanor in the courtroom? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 74% 69% 72% B 13% 17% 16% C 4% 6% 5% D 2% 2% Fail 4% 3% 2% No Grade 4% 3% 3% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 12 ## Page 41 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 4b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on listening patiently to all testimony and arguments before issuing a ruling? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 70% 64% 66% B 13% 18% 17% C 9% 6% 5% D 3% 2% Fail 4% 4% 3% No Grade 4% 6% 6% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 13 ## Page 42 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 5a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on managing cases efficiently and with minimal delay? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 52% 55% 56% B 26% 23% 22% C 9% 9% 8% D 2% 3% Fail 3% 2% No Grade 13% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.5 3.4 3.4 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 14 ## Page 43 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 5b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on starting court on time? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 65% 55% 57% B 22% 23% 23% C 9% 9% D 3% 3% Fail 3% 2% No Grade 13% 6% 6% Average Grade 3.8 3.3 3.4 Letter Grade A- B B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 15 ## Page 44 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 5c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on being prepared for cases? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 65% 61% 64% B 9% 19% 18% C 4% 7% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 4% 2% 2% No Grade 17% 9% 9% Average Grade 3.6 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 16 ## Page 45 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 6a. How would you grade Judge Vickers on considering all information presented when making a decision? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 56% 60% 62% B 13% 17% 16% C 6% 6% 5% D 3% 2% Fail 6% 4% 4% No Grade 19% 10% 11% Average Grade 3.4 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B+ B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 17 ## Page 46 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 6b. How would you grade Judge Vickers on having knowledge of the rules of evidence, procedure and the law? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 43% 64% 67% B 13% 17% 16% C 9% 5% 5% D 4% 2% 2% Fail 4% 2% 2% No Grade 26% 10% 10% Average Grade 3.2 3.5 3.6 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 18 ## Page 47 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 6c. How would you grade Judge Vickers on deciding important matters in a timely way? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 69% 60% 62% B 6% 19% 18% C 6% 6% D 2% 2% Fail 2% 2% No Grade 25% 11% 10% Average Grade 3.9 3.5 3.5 Letter Grade A- B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 19 ## Page 48 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 6d. How would you grade Judge Vickers on making decisions without regard to public criticism? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 A 52% 53% 55% B 4% 15% 14% C 4% 5% 5% D 4% 2% 2% Fail 13% 3% 3% No Grade 22% 21% 22% Average Grade 3.0 3.4 3.5 Letter Grade B B+ B+ Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 Page 20 ## Page 49 Judge Larry E. Vickers Non-Attorney Survey 7. Do you recommend that Judge Vickers be retained in office or not be retained in office? Judge All County All Trial Vickers Judges 2002 Judges 2002 Retain in office 83% 81% 83% Do not retain in office 13% 9% 8% No opinion 4% 11% 9% Judicial Performance Survey 2002 Judicial District 7 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 Larry E. Vickers Survey Disposition Report Total Refusals & Undeliv- Other Response Sent Completes Nonresponse erables Response Rate District Attorney 3 1 1 1 50.0% Attorney For Defendant 7 5 2 100.0% Attorney for Plaintiff 1 1 100.0% Guardian ad Litem Unknown Attorney Type 4 4 Sub Total: 15 7 1 1 6 87.5% Law Enforcement 2 2 Social Services Caseworker Employee 5 2 1 2 66.7% Defendant 64 19 31 14 38.0% Plaintiff 6 2 3 1 40.0% Juror Victim Other 6 1 2 2 1 33.3% Sub Total: 83 24 39 17 3 38.1% Total: 98 31 40 18 9 43.7% 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 7

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