On Monday, October 21, 2024, Westword published an article detailing how Colorado voters can evaluate judicial performance ahead of the November elections. With nearly 120 judges on the ballot this year, including several from the state Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, understanding their performance is crucial for informed voting.

The article highlights the role of the Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation, which oversees commissions in each judicial district tasked with assessing judges’ performance. Since 1996, Colorado has shifted from partisan elections to a retention voting system for judges, allowing voters to decide whether to retain judges after their initial appointment. This change was spearheaded by the Colorado League of Women Voters, aiming to enhance judicial independence by removing the influence of campaign contributions.

Judges serve a two-year provisional term before facing voters for retention. Following this initial period, they serve fixed terms—four years for county court judges, six years for district court judges, eight years for Court of Appeals judges, and ten years for Supreme Court justices. Judges must retire upon reaching the age of 72.

The article notes that the upcoming election includes retention votes for several prominent judges, including three members of the Colorado Supreme Court: Monica Márquez, Maria Berkenkotter, and Brian Boatright. All three have met the performance standards set by the evaluation commissions.

Voters can access evaluation results through the Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation’s website, where they can find performance metrics for each judge. The evaluation process includes observations of judges in action, surveys from court users, reviews of written opinions, and interviews with judges and relevant parties. Performance metrics consider various factors, such as general judicial conduct, fairness, and case management.

In 2024, the evaluation results indicated that nearly all judges met the established performance standards, with the exception of Garfield County Court Judge Angela Roff. She received an unfavorable review due to concerns about her legal knowledge and administrative skills. The evaluation commission voted 4-3 against her, citing inconsistencies in her interpretation and application of the law. Judge Roff has responded by highlighting improvements in her performance and encouraging voters to observe her work firsthand.

Additionally, the article discusses Amendment H, which is on the ballot this year, proposing changes to the handling of ethics complaints against judges. This amendment aims to establish a new board to address ethics complaints and to make these complaints public once formal charges are filed. Currently, such complaints are disclosed only when the state Commission on Judicial Discipline recommends sanctions.

Under the proposed amendment, complaints will continue to be screened for validity by the Commission on Judicial Discipline, but formal hearings will be transferred to an Independent Judicial Adjudicative Board. This new board would consist of district court judges, attorneys, and citizens appointed by the governor. The amendment requires a 55 percent majority to pass, reflecting its significance in enhancing transparency within Colorado’s judicial system.

The article emphasizes the importance of being informed about judicial performance and the implications of Amendment H as Coloradans prepare for the elections. Voters are encouraged to utilize the resources available through the Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation to make educated decisions regarding the judges on their ballots.

 

 

Source: Westword