By Rocky Mountain Voice | Commentary
In addition to 14 amendments and statutory propositions appearing on ballots statewide and local ballot measures, voters are being asked to consider the retention of a number of state judges.
The issue, readers have shared with the Rocky Mountain Voice, is finding complete information in order to make an educated decision on these positions. Below, is the second installment of our judicial retention review, the Colorado Court of Appeals. The five judges to review are, as they appear on your ballot: Hon. Stephanie Dunn, Hon. Jerry N. Jones, Hon. W. Eric Kuhn, Hon. Gilbert M. Román and Hon. Timothy J. Schutz. Information on other courts and judges will be presented in future installments of this series.
Background: Judge Dunn was appointed by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper in 2012 as a judge of the Court of Appeals. She earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado in 1990 and earned her law degree from the University of Denver, Sturm College of Law in 1993. Before joining the bench, she was a partner at the law firm of Perkins Coie, LLC, where she practiced from 2003-2012. While a partner at Perkins Coie, she was chair of both the Denver Diversity committee and the Denver Pro Bono committee. Her work at Perkins Coie focused on business litigation and appellate practice in both state and federal courts. In addition to membership in several bar associations, she is a member of the National Association of Women Judges and The Colorado Lawyer’s Committee Hate Crimes Education Task Force. She also is a fellow of the Colorado Bar Foundation and participates in the Our Courts program.
Recommendation: No (oppose). Dunn previously worked for Perkins Coie before being appointed to the Appeals Court. This is the firm that orchestrated the Russian Dossier hoax against President Donald J. Trump, on behalf of Hillary Clinton, for the purpose of trying to defeat him and later to remove him from office. It taints this judge’s background, as well as having been appointed by a Democratic governor. The 2023 performance review showed that 7% of the 96 responding attorneys and 3% of the 25 responding judges agreed the judge did not meet performance standards. Her 2024 review shows that 6% of the 17 responding attorneys and 0% of the 33 responding judges agree the judge did not meet the performance requirements.
State Commission: Found that Dunn “meets performance standards”, by a vote of 10–0 with one recusal. Colorado’s statutory judicial performance standards are integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, and service to the legal profession and the public.
Dunn has been on the Colorado Court of Appeals since 2012 and this is her second time standing for retention as a Court of Appeals judge. The Commission finds that her opinions are thoughtful and she has an excellent judicial demeanor. She is an increasingly senior judge who is successfully mentoring and training a new cohort of colleagues while successfully managing an extraordinarily busy docket. The Commission commended Dunn notably for her significant engagement in the community and leadership roles on myriad committees designed to advance the profession and the operation of the courts. In sum, the Commission found Dunn to be a valuable and effective member of the Court of Appeals.
To conduct its evaluation, the Commission interviewed Dunn, reviewed her self-evaluation, observed oral arguments, read a selection of her legal opinions, and considered survey responses from attorneys and judges. Survey respondents agreed Dunn meets judicial performance standards: 94% of attorneys and 100% of judges who responded to that question answered “yes.” She received an overall score of 3.8 on a 4.0 scale. Dunn received positive comments from lawyers and judges for being fair, impartial and neutral and with regard to her exceptional analytic and writing skills. A total of 16 attorneys and 33 judges responded to the survey.
Background: Judge Jones was appointed by Republican Gov. Bill Owens in 2006 to the Court of Appeals. Prior to serving on the Court of Appeals he was a partner at the Denver law firm of Moye White, LLP, practicing in commercial litigation and appeals. During his time at Moye White, Jones also served as a special assistant attorney general in the state services section, working on higher education issues, and in the criminal section handling appeals on behalf of the people of Colorado. He also served as the chief of the appellate division of the United States Attorney’s Office for two years. Jones was a member of the faculty of federal advocates and served as chair of the judicial performance commission for the 2nd Judicial District. He is a 1986 graduate of the University of Denver Sturm College of Law and served on the executive board of the University of Denver Law Review.
Recommendation: No (oppose). It is noted Jones was appointed by a Republican governor, but his 2023 performance versus 2024, in regards to attorney reviews, was a move in the wrong direction. Ninety attorneys responded and 23 judges responded with 15% of the attorneys and 3% of the judges stating he did not meet performance standards. In 2024, only 20 attorneys responded with 25% stating Jones did not meet performance standards, while 26 judges responded and none made that response. It appears, based upon the summary below, this judge has not changed his behavior and after 18 years on the bench, is not likely to change. Contrary, we might not oppose voters supporting Jones simply on the grounds of judicial balance as a Republican governor’s appointee.
State Commission: Found that Jones “meets performance standards” by a vote of 10-0 with one recusal. The Colorado statutory judicial performance standards are integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, administrative performance, and service to the legal profession and public.
Jones has been on the Colorado Court of Appeals for 18 years. His last retention evaluation was in 2016. The Commission finds that Jones is fair and impartial, is thoroughly prepared for oral arguments, has a keen intellect, and writes clear legal opinions based upon the facts and law. In its evaluation, the Commission uses survey data with feedback from attorneys participating in oral arguments. Judge Jones actively participates in oral arguments. In current and prior surveys related to oral arguments, Jones was both commended and criticized concerning his perceived demeanor during oral argument. Commissioners reviewed a large sample of recorded oral arguments in which Jones was a member of the panel. At times, his judicial temperament can appear adversarial and discourteous. We understand and share these concerns. During Jones’ interview with the Commission, he expressed an openness to recommendations on how to improve his personal style. We believe one way in which Jones might address some of the concerns about his temperament during oral arguments would be to briefly explain to counsel how a particular line of questioning will help inform his approach to the case. The Commission applauds Jones’ leadership on several Colorado Supreme Court and bar association committees, and the Commission enjoyed hearing Judge Jones describe how meaningful his co-coaching of a high school mock trial team was for him.
To conduct the evaluation, the Commission interviewed Judge Jones, reviewed his self-evaluation, observed oral arguments, read a selection of his legal opinions, and considered survey responses from attorneys and judges. One survey question asked whether Judge Jones met judicial performance standards. Of the attorneys who responded to that question, 75% answered yes and 25% answered no. Of the judges who responded to that question, 100% answered yes. A total of 20 attorneys and 27 judges responded to the survey.
Background: Judge Kuhn was appointed by Democratic Gov. Jared Polis in 2021 to the Colorado Court of Appeals. He earned his undergraduate degree from Colorado College and his law degree from the University of Denver. He started his career in private practice handling probate and estate planning matters. He moved to the Colorado Department of Law where he served as a senior assistant attorney general in the health care and public officials units. In those roles, he handled all aspects of advice, litigation, and appeals, focusing on healthcare, public health, and complex constitutional and legal questions faced by elected officials and government agencies. He is an active member of the Minoru Yasui Inn of Court and is a trustee for a national foundation focused on innovations in aging.
Recommendation: No (oppose). Kuhn was significantly involved in the COVID restrictions implemented by Gov. Polis (see below), which in retrospect many find to have been one of the greatest constitutional abuses in the nation’s history. It also should be noted, Kuhn was appointed by Democratic Gov. Polis. Kuhn’s review in 2023 showed 18% of the 99 attorneys responding and 8% of the 13 judges responding stated he did not meet the performance standards.
From Colorado Politics: “Kuhn’s additional work during the pandemic included standing up a public health operation and giving guidance that many of us, including me, did not know existed,” Weiser said. “As I learned from Eric, the state and county public health departments had this wide authority to act, imposing restrictions that would guide action during this public health emergency.”
From Colorado Judicial: “Judge Kuhn is active in many professional organizations. He is a member of the Minoru Yasui Inn of Court, which is dedicated to improving the skills, professionalism, and ethics of the bench and bar, and the Colorado LGBTQ+ Bar Association.“
State Commission: Found Kuhn “meets performance standards”, by a vote of 10–0 with one recusal. Colorado’s statutory judicial performance standards are integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, and service to the legal profession and the public.
Kuhn has been on the Colorado Court of Appeals since July 2021. This is his first time standing for retention as a Court of Appeals judge. The Commission finds that his opinions are timely, clear, and well-reasoned. At oral arguments, he is well-prepared, succinct in his questions, and respectful. The Commission commends Judge Kuhn for his collegiality and collaboration among his colleagues, for his work on a special division to help reduce the court’s COVID backlog, and also for his work as the co-chair of the Appellate Courts Technology Committee. In sum, the Commission finds Kuhn is a valuable addition to the Court of Appeals.
To conduct our evaluation, the Commission interviewed Kuhn, reviewed his self-evaluation, observed oral arguments, read a selection of his legal opinions, and considered survey responses from attorneys and judges. Survey respondents agreed Kuhn meets judicial performance standards. 88% of attorneys and 100% of judges who responded to that question answered “yes.” He received an overall score of 3.7 on a 4.0 scale. Judge Kuhn received positive comments from lawyers for his preparation and temperament at oral argument, and comments from fellow judges for his collegiality and work ethic. A total of 18 attorneys and 24 judges responded to the survey.
Background: Judge Román was appointed by Republican Gov. Bill Owens in 2005 to the Colorado Court of Appeals. He is a 1984 graduate of Colorado State University and received his law degree from the University of Michigan Law School in 1987. Prior to his appointment, Chief Judge Román was in private practice focusing on complex civil litigation. He has received a number of awards, including the Richard Marden Davis Award from the Denver Bar Foundation and the Outstanding Lawyer Award from the Hispanic National Bar Association. Román has served as an adjunct faculty member at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law and as an instructor at the National Institute for Trial Advocacy. He formerly served on the board of governors for the Colorado Bar Association and as a board member of both the Colorado Hispanic and the Hispanic National Bar Associations. Román is very active in the community, representing the judicial branch in many educational and professional forums.
Recommendation: Yes (support). Román’s 2023 rating was very good, with no attorneys stating he did not meet performance standards, but his 2024 rating had 15% (two attorneys) stating the same. It is unknown why the significant change, but it is not lost on us that he was appointed by a Republican governor, which might help provide the balance most Coloradans are looking for in their justice system. Keep this judge as one of the few having been appointed by a Republican governor.
State Commission: Found that Román “meets performance standards”, by a vote of 10-0 with one recusal. Colorado’s statutory judicial performance standards are integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, and service to the legal profession and the public.
Román has been on the Colorado Court of Appeals since August 2005 and this is his third time standing for retention as a Court of Appeals judge. The Commission finds that his opinions are thoughtful and he has an excellent judicial demeanor. He is an engaged leader who successfully manages an extraordinarily busy docket on an individual and collective basis. The Commission commends Román especially for his leadership and management training and his extraordinary service driving public trust and confidence in the state’s judicial system. In sum, the Commission finds Román is a valuable and effective leader of the Court of Appeals.
To conduct its evaluation, the Commission interviewed Román, reviewed his self-evaluation, observed oral arguments, read a selection of his legal opinions, and considered survey responses from attorneys and judges. Survey respondents agreed Román meets judicial performance standards: 77% of attorneys and 100% of judges who responded to that question answered “yes.” He received an overall score of 3.7 on a 4.0 scale. Chief Judge Román received positive comments from lawyers and judges for being fair, impartial and neutral and with regard to his exceptional writing skills. A total of 13 attorneys and 34 judges responded to the survey.
Background: Judge Schutz was appointed by Democratic Gov. Jared Polis in 2021 to the Colorado Court of Appeals. Schutz earned his undergraduate degree from Minnesota State University Moorhead and his law degree from the University of North Dakota. He started his career at the law firm of Holland & Hart. Later he practiced at the law firm of Hanes & Schutz in the areas of intellectual property, civil litigation, land use disputes and the representation of special districts. After two decades in private practice, Schutz was appointed to the District Court for the 4th Judicial District (El Paso County) as a trial court judge, and for 11 years he managed active criminal, civil, juvenile and domestic cases. Schutz is a champion for race equality in our justice system.
Recommendation: No (oppose). Schutz appears to believe the equity and systemic rhetoric that has permeated society. According to Colorado Politics, the judge has advocated for the inclusion of a transgender or nonbinary designation on juror questionnaires. His 2023 performance showed that 13% of the 110 responding attorneys and 8% of the 15 responding judges believed the judge did not meet the performance standards. The 2024 performance review showed that 11% of the 16 responding attorneys and 0% of the 29 responding judges believed the judge did not meet the performance standards.
The below from Schutz were spoken during his swearing-in ceremony and reported by Colorado Politics: During the ceremony, Schutz, of Monument, strongly endorsed a judicial philosophy that inserts equity as a factor in legal decision-making. “Tradition and precedent are cornerstone, necessary and ongoing virtues of the rule of law,” he said. “But they can also sometimes perpetuate systemic inequities and biases and serve as a shortcut to avoid the risk and the burdens of analysis grounded in furtherance of the highest ideals of our country’s founding.”
State Commission: Found that Schutz “meets performance standards”, by a vote of 10-0 with one recusal. Colorado’s statutory judicial performance standards are integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, and service to the legal profession and the public.
Schutz has been on the Colorado Court of Appeals since January 2022, and this is his first time standing for retention as a Court of Appeals judge. The Commission finds that his opinions are thoughtful, organized, and well-written. At oral argument he has an excellent judicial demeanor, engages with questions, and is conscientious of all parties. The Commission commends Schutz especially for his extraordinary service to the Access to Justice Commission and his efforts on issues surrounding race and the justice system. In sum, the Commission finds Schutz is a valuable addition to the Court of Appeals.
To conduct its evaluation, the Commission interviewed Judge Schutz, reviewed his self-evaluation, observed oral arguments, read a selection of his legal opinions, and considered survey responses from attorneys and judges. Survey respondents agreed Judge Schutz meets judicial performance standards. 78% of attorneys and 94% of judges who responded to that question answered “yes.” He received an overall score of 3.5 on a 4.0 scale. Schutz received positive comments from lawyers with respect to his courteous and empathetic demeanor during oral arguments, and from fellow judges especially with respect to the valuable perspective that he brings as a former trial court judge. A total of 19 attorneys and 31 judges responded to the survey.