By Michael Karlik | Colorado Politics
Of the 123 Colorado judges standing for retention on the November ballot, citizen-led performance commissions found that three did not meet the required performance standards.
However, in an unprecedented move, the commission charged with evaluating Supreme Court and Court of Appeals members stepped in to issue its own narrative after it concluded the local performance commission in northeastern Colorado violated the rules in a “serious” manner when it gave an unfavorable review to one judge.
Under Colorado’s system of selecting judges, the governor appoints new judges from a short list created by citizen-led nominating commissions that screen and interview applicants. Judges serve for at least two years before voters decide whether to retain them to terms of varying lengths. Supreme Court justices, for instance, serve 10-year terms, while county court judges serve for only four years.
To aid voters in making retention decisions, performance commissions in the 23 judicial districts — plus a statewide commission and one focused on the Denver County Court — issue narratives about each judge’s performance. The members rely on responses from attorneys, litigants, other judges, and jurors. They also observe the judges and speak with them to determine whether each meets established standards for demeanor, case management, and other metrics.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE AT COLORADO POLITICS