EJF Newsletter — 2022 Review of Colorado Judges

Additional copies of this report in printable PDF format (13 pages) are available on the web.

Basic to the rule of law is the selection of competent, well-educated, and wise judges. Conversely, there must be an effective and easy to understand way of removing those who don't make the cut. Our review of Colorado judges standing for retention in 2022 is attached.

To help weed out bad judges all Colorado state judges must stand for retention by the voters at fixed intervals in even years. Reports on each judge are prepared by judicial performance commissions in each of the 22 judicial districts. But, being political, these commissions whitewash the judges and every judge is found to meet the “standards.”

In 2022 there were 164 judges eligible to stand for retention in Colorado but only 140 were evaluated by the commissions. Of these 140 only 135 are actually standing for retention and are tabulated here.

For a decade the Equal Justice Foundation has been independently tracking judicial performance, and postulates that the total number of bad judges is considerably more than the judicial commissions indicate. Seeking a better method of evaluating judges, and inasmuch as the judicial performance commissions seek input from the attorneys who know the judges, in 2012 we began compiling our own tabulation of good and bad judges based solely on the attorney votes reported to the separate commissions. In essence the attorneys perform as a jury of the judge's peers. That provides a simple to understand and brief statement of the judge's performance, and what the attorneys who know the judge best think of them.

Prior to 2017 the judicial commissions reported their evaluation of a judge with the recommendation to Retain or Do Not Retain. Today the commissions report only as Meets Standards or Does Not Meet Standards. Inasmuch as all the judges evaluated in 2022 are said to Meet Standards, we have found that approach useless for someone trying to determine if a given judge should be kept on the bench, or made to step down. Inasmuch as when we began this project in 2012 the commissions were reporting Retain/Do Not Retain, we have found it more informative to continue using that measure, with the addition of an intermediate Marginal finding for our report.

As in the past, the EJF 2022 judicial performance review based on attorney votes is attached. By this measure 26 (19.3%) of the 135 judges standing for retention this year should not be retained and voted off the bench. By the same criteria, the performance of 30 (22.2%) more judges is found to be marginal at best. Of course, 29 (17.7%) state judges are not bothering to stand and are not tabulated here.

Conversely, attorneys rated 35 (26%; shown in bold) of the state judges standing for retention as outstanding.

If you live in another state perhaps our method may be of some use in establishing a similar method of evaluating judges. Additional copies of our 2022 report can be found online and reviews and much of the history of all Colorado judges can be found here.

2022 Colorado Judicial Performance Evaluations

October 17, 2022

Top

EJF Evaluations Based On Attorney Judgments

2022 Judicial Performance Commission Evaluation						2022 EJF Evaluation Based on Attorney Votes
Judge	Commission Finding	Attorney Votes		Prior Rating
Judge	Commission Finding	Retain	Do Not Retain	Attorney % Retain
Colorado Supreme Court
No Supreme Court justice stood for retention in 2022
Colorado Court of Appeals
				Prior 2014		2022
Jaclyn C. Brown	Meets Standards	85%	15%	Not on bench		Marginal
Maria Theresa Fox	Meets Standards	71%	21%	69%	Do Not Retain	Very Marginal
Christina Finzell Gomez	Meets Standards	57%	14%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Matthew D. Grove	Meets Standards	79%	21%	Not on bench		Marginal
Sueanna P. Johnson	Meets Standards	82%	6%	Not on bench		Marginal
Lino S. Lipinsky de Orlov	Meets Standards	88%	12%	Not on bench		Retain
Neeti V. Pawar	Meets Standards	78%	11%	Not on bench		Marginal
David H.Yun	Meets Standards	71%	11%	Not on bench		Marginal
First Judicial District Judges (Gilpin, Jefferson)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Russell B. Klein	Meets Standards	82%	12%	Not on bench		Marginal
Robert C Lochary	Meets Standards	96%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Philip James McNulty	Meets Standards	81%	11%	92%	Retain	Marginal
Jeffrey R. Pilkington	Meets Standards	57%	26%	62%	Do Not Retain	Do Not Retain
Lindsay L. VanGilder	Meets Standards	88%	12%	Not on bench		Retain
Todd L. Vriesman	Meets Standards	83%	15%	51%	Do Not Retain	Marginal
Gilpin County				Prior 2018		2022
David C. Taylor	Meets Standards	94%	6%	No opinion		Retain
Jefferson County (First Judicial District continued)				Prior 2018		2022
Sara M Garrido	Meets Standards	97%	3%	Not on bench		Retain
Connie Magid	Meets Standards	61%	17%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Jennifer Lynn Melton	Meets Standards	83%	13%	Not on bench		Marginal
Mark M. Randall	Meets Standards	85%	15%	87%	Retain	Marginal
Second Judicial District Judges (Denver County)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Lisa C. Arnolds	Meets Standards	88%	6%	Not on bench		Retain
Nikea T. Bland	Meets Standards	95%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Karen L. Brody	Meets Standards	90%	4%	93%	Retain	Retain
Laurie A.Clark	Meets Standards	44%	56%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Jill Dorancy	Meets Standards	91%	6%	Not on bench		Retain
Ericka F. H. Englert	Meets Standards	53%	47%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Kandace C. Gerdes	Meets Standards	74%	22%	63%	Do Not Retain	Marginal
Eric M. Johnson	Meets Standards	50%	46%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Andy McCallin	Meets Standards	89%	6%	96%	Retain	Retain
Pax Moultrie	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Darryl Shockley	Meets Standards	91%	6%	Not on bench		Retain
Brett Woods	Meets Standards	57%	29%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Denver County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Andrea Eddy	Meets Standards	100%	0%	92%	Retain	Retain
Olympia Z. Fay	Meets Standards	85%	15%	90%	Retain	Marginal
Clarisse Gonzales	Meets Standards	89%	6%	82%	Marginal	Retain
Kerri Lombardi	Meets Standards	71%	29%	79%	Marginal	Very Marginal
Chelsea Malone	Meets Standards	100%	0%	100%	Retain	Retain
Michelle Martinez-Thomas	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Judith Smith	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Tanya E. Wheeler	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
James Zobel	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Third Judicial District Judges (Huerfano, Las Animas)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
J. Clay McKisson	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Promoted from county court judge		Retain
Huerfano County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Dawn Marie Mann	Meets Standards	80%	20%	Not on bench		Marginal
Las Animas County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
John D. Mochel	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Fourth Judicial District Judges (El Paso, Teller)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Robin Lynn Chittum	Meets Standards	95%	5%	91%	Retain	Retain
Jessica Curtis	Meets Standards	89%	6%	Not on bench		Retain
David A. Gilbert	Meets Standards	67%	22%	84%	Marginal	Do Not Retain
Catherine M. Helton	Meets Standards	93%	7%	Not on bench		Retain
Marcus S. Henson	Meets Standards	85%	11%	Not on bench		Marginal
Francis R. Johnson	Meets Standards	82%	12%	Not on bench		Marginal
Chad C. Miller	Meets Standards	90%	7%	Not on bench		Retain
Marla Prudek	Meets Standards	83%	14%	58%	Do Not Retain	Marginal
El Paso County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Samorreyan Burney	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Meredith Patrick Cord	Meets Standards	88%	6%	Not on bench		Retain
Dulce Denise Peacock	Meets Standards	88%	12%	Not on Bench		Retain
Ann M. Rotolo	Meets Standards	84%	11%	73%	Marginal	Marginal
Teller County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Theresa L. Kilgore	Meets Standards	89%	11%	64%	Do Not Retain	Retain




Fifth Judicial District Judges (Clear Creek, Eagle, Lake, Summit)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Catherine J. Cheroutes	Meets Standards	78%	13%	Not on bench		Marginal
Paul R. Dunkelman	Meets Standards	96%	0%	100%	Retain	Retain
Reed W. Owens	Meets Standards	97%	3%	Not on bench		Retain
Karen Ann Romeo	Meets Standards	88%	9%	90%	Retain	Retain
No Clear Creek County Judge stood for retention in 2022
No Eagle County Judge stood for retention in 2022
No Lake County Judge stood for retention in 2022
No Summit County Judge stood for retention in 2022
Sixth Judicial District Judges (Archuleta, La Plata, San Juan)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Jeffrey R. Wilson	Meets Standards	77%	18%	86%	Retain	Marginal
Archuleta County Judge					2018	2022
Justin P. Fay	Meets Standards	100%	0%	86%	Retain	Retain
La Plata County Judge					2018	2022
Anne Kathryn Woods	Meets Standards	53%	34%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
No San Juan County Judge stood for retention in 2022
Seventh Judicial District (Delta, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Montrose, Ouray, San Miguel)
No District Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Delta County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Gunnison County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Hinsdale County				Prior 2018		2022
James R. McDonald	Meets Standards	Not given		Not on bench		Undetermined
No Montrose County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Ouray County Judges stood for retention in 2022
San Miguel County Judge				2018		2022
Sean Murphy	Meets Standards	50%	50%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain

Eighth Judicial District Judges (Jackson, Larimer)
District Court Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Carroll Michele Brinegar	Meets Standards	100%	0%	84%	Marginal	Retain
Laurie K. Dean	Meets Standards	93%	7%	Not on bench		Retain
Gregory M. Lammons	Meets Standards	84%	8%	84%	Marginal	Marginal
Daniel McDonald	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Jackson County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Chelsea W. Rengel	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Larimer County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Katharine Ellison	Meets Standards	94%	6%	Not on bench		Retain
Thomas L. Lynch	Meets Standards	88%	8%	92%	Retain	Retain
Ninth Judicial District Judges (Garfield, Pitkin, Rio Blanco)
District Judge				Prior 2016		2022
John Fowler Neiley	Meets Standards	94%	3%	100%	Retain	Retain
Garfield County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Johnathan B. Pototsky	Meets Standards	89%	4%	100%	Retain	Retain
No Pitkin County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Rio Blanco County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Joe Fennessy	Meets Standards	67%	0%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Tenth Judicial District Judges (Pueblo)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Thomas B. Flesher	Meets Standards	43%	29%	94%	Retain	Do Not Retain
Amiel J. Markenson	Meets Standards	47%	41%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Larry Schwartz	Meets Standards	100%	0%	78%	Marginal	Retain
Gregory J. Styduhar	Meets Standards	88%	6%	Not on bench		Retain
Pueblo County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Steven B. Fieldman	Meets Standards	64%	36%	97%	Retain	Do Not Retain


Eleventh Judicial District Judges (Chaffee, Custer, Fremont, Park)
District Judge				Prior 2016		2022
Patrick William Murphy	Meets Standards	81%	19%	87%	Retain	Marginal
No Chaffee County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Custer County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Fremont County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Alexandra Olsen Robak	Meets Standards	87%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Park County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Brian L. Green	Meets Standards	87%	7%	70%	Do Not Retain	Retain
Twelfth Judicial District Judges (Alamosa, Conejos, Costilla, Mineral, Rio Grande, Saguache)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Crista Newmyer-Olsen	Meets Standards	92%	4%	Not on bench		Retain
Alamosa County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Daniel A. Walzl	Meets Standards	69%	31%	80%	Retain	Do Not Retain
No Conejos County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Costilla County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Mineral County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Rio Grande County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Saguache County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Thirteenth Judicial District Judges (Kit Carson, Logan, Morgan, Phillips, Sedgwick, Washington, Yuma)
District Judge				Prior 2016		2022
Stephanie M. G. Cagliano	Meets Standards	69%	23%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Kit Carson County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Michael K. Grinnan	Meets Standards	Only two votes, one for, one against		94%	Retain	Undetermined
No Logan County Judges stood for retention in 2022

Morgan County Judge (13th Judicial district continued)				Prior 2018		2022
Dennis Brandenburg	Meets Standards	92%	8%	Not on bench		Retain
Washington County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Kelly S. Hansen	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Insufficient data		Retain
No Phillips, Sedgwick, or Yuma County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Fourteenth Judicial District Judges (Grand, Moffat, Routt)
District Judge				Prior 2016		2022
Mary C. Hoak	Meets Standards	65%	27%	81%	Marginal	Do Not Retain
Grand County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Nicholas Catanzanite	Meets Standards	68%	26%	70%	Do Not Retain	Do Not Retain
Moffat County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Brittany Schneider	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
No Routt County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Fifteenth Judicial District Judges (Baca, Cheyenne, Kiowa, Prowers)
No District Court judges stood for retention in 2022
No Baca County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Cheyenne County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Kiowa County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Gary W. Davis	Meets Standards	50%	50%	50%	Do Not Retain	Do Not Retain
Prowers County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Curtis L. Porter	Meets Standards	86%	0%	100%	Retain	Retain
Sixteenth Judicial District Judges (Bent, Crowley, Otero)
District Judge				Prior 2016		2022
Mark A. MacDonnell	Meets Standards	67%	11%	78%	Marginal	Do Not Retain
No Bent County Judges stood for retention in 2022
No Crowley County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Otero County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Douglas R. Manley	Meets Standards	100%	0%	86%	Retain	Retain
Seventeenth Judicial District Judges (Adams, Broomfield)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Emily C. Lieberman	Meets Standards	96%	4%	Not on bench		Retain
Rayna Gokli McIntyre	Meets Standards	79%	21%	Not on bench		Marginal
Patrick H. Pugh	Meets Standards	82%	18%	Not on bench		Marginal
Kyle Seedorf	Meets Standards	87%	10%	Not on bench		Retain
Jeffrey Smith	Meets Standards	96%	4%	Not on bench		Retain
Adams County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
MaryAnn Vielma	Meets Standards	95%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
No Broomfield County Judges stood for retention in 2022
Eighteenth Judicial District Judges (Arapahoe, Douglas, Elbert, Lincoln)
District Court Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Jeffrey K. Holmes	Meets Standards	88%	12%	92%	Retain	Retain
Harold Clayburn Hurst	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Ryan J. Stuart	Meets Standards	96%	4%	Not on bench		Retain
Eric B. White	Meets Standards	83%	17%	Not on bench		Marginal
Arapahoe County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Colleen E. Clark	Meets Standards	83%	8%	63%	Do Not Retain	Marginal
Kelly LaFave	Meets Standards	63%	38%	53%	Do Not Retain	Do Not Retain
Michael J. Roche	Meets Standards	89%	5%	67%	Do Not Retain	Retain
Cheryl Rowles-Stokes	Meets Standards	81%	19%	45%	Do Not Retain	Do Not Retain
Douglas County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
Lawrence Bowling	Meets Standards	97%	3%	96%	Retain	Retain
Kolony L. Fields	Meets Standards	95%	3%	Not on bench		Retain
Elbert County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Palmer L. Boyette	Meets Standards	94%	6%	93%	Retain	Retain
Lincoln County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Truston Lee Fisher	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Insufficient data		Retain

Nineteenth Judicial District Judges (Weld)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
W. Troy Hause	Meets Standards	85%	15%	92%	Retain	Retain
Julie C. Hoskins	Meets Standards	86%	7%	89%	Retain	Retain
Shannon D. Lyons	Meets Standards	86%	9%	66%	Do Not Retain	Marginal
Meghan P. Saleebey	Meets Standards	75%	25%	Not on bench		Marginal
Kimberly B. Schutt	Meets Standards	88%	8%	Not on bench		Retain
Vicente G. Vigil	Meets Standards	90%	10%	Not on bench		Retain
Weld County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
John J. Briggs	Meets Standards	89%	11%	88%	Retain	Retain
Michele Meyer	Meets Standards	95%	5%	92%	Retain	Retain
Dana Nichols	Meets Standards	90%	5%	82%	Marginal	Retain
Twentieth Judicial District Judges (Boulder)
District Judges				Prior 2016		2022
Andrew Hartman	Meets Standards	88%	10%	89%	Retain	Retain
Bruce Langer	Meets Standards	94%	2%	81%	Marginal	Retain
Boulder County Judges				Prior 2018		2022
David A. Archuleta	Meets Standards	89%	9%	80%	Marginal	Retain
Elizabeth Brodsky	Meets Standards	100%	0%	89%	Retain	Retain
Zachary I. Malkinson	Meets Standards	94%	3%	Not on bench		Retain
Kristy Allyne Martinez	Meets Standards	70%	30%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Twenty-First Judicial District Judges (Mesa)
District Court Judge				Prior 2016		2022
Matthew D. Barrett	Meets Standards	65%	26%	Not on bench		Do Not Retain
Richard T. Gurley	Meets Standards	95%	0%	97%	Retain	Retain
Valerie Jo Robinson	Meets Standards	84%	9%	59%	Do Not Retain	Marginal
Mesa County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Bruce R. Raaum	Meets Standards	95%	5%	73%	Marginal	Retain

Twenty-Second Judicial District Judges (Dolores, Montezuma)
No District Court Judges stood for retention in 2022
Dolores County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
Anthony Nathaniel Baca	Meets Standards	100%	0%	Not on bench		Retain
Montezuma County Judge				Prior 2018		2022
JenniLynn E. Lawrence	Meets Standards	94%	0%	71%	Marginal	Retain

Notes

Top

The table above is intended as brief reference to help voters decide how to vote on state judges in their judicial district who are standing for retention in November 2022.

Criteria

• Retain >85% of attorneys voted to retain;

• Marginal 71-85% of attorneys voted to retain;

• Do Not Retain <=70% of attorneys voted to retain. Note that this level was lowered from 75% to 70% in 2018 suggesting judicial standards are not improving.

Retention intervals

Top

All state judges first stand for retention in even years two years after their appointment or a promotion to a higher bench. After that they stand for retention based on the court they sit in at the following intervals so long as they remain on that bench:

• Supreme Court justices — every 10 years;

• Court of Appeals judges — every 8 years;

• District court judges — every 6 years;

• County court judges — every 4 years.

The official judicial performance commission evaluations for state judges dates back to 1990. They have been posting percentages of attorney votes for and against a judge since 2000, and the EJF has been producing a biennial review based on the state evaluations since 2012 using the attorney votes.

The following table summarizes the retention recommendations of the Colorado Judicial Performance Evaluations (CO JPE) versus those of the Equal Justice Foundation (EJF) based solely on how attorneys vote for a judge for the six retention cycles, 2012 to 2022, we've reviewed to date.

Colorado judicial performance evaluation statistics based on stated criteria
Year	Total Number Judges Eligible For Retention	Percent Who Actually Stood For Retention	Judicial Performance Statistics by Year
			Retain or Meets Performance Standard		Do Not Retain or Does Not Meet Performance Standard		Marginal
			CO JPE	EJF	CO JPE	EJF	EJF
2012	90	97.8%	88 (97.8%)	60 (66.7%)	1 (1.1%)	16 (17.8%)	14 (15.6%)
2014	146	97.3%	142 (97.3%)	55 (37.7%)	2 (1.4%)	44 (30.1%)	47 (32.2%)
2016	108	98.1%	106 (98.1%)	42 (38.9%)	2 (1.9%)	32 (29.6%)	34 (31.5%)
2018	128	98.4%	126 (98.4%)	59 (46.1%)	2 (1.8%)	25 (19.5%)	42 (32.8%)
2020	118	87.3%	103 (87.3%)	57 (48.3%)	2 (1.7%)	18 (15.3%)	28 (23.7%)
2022	164	82.3%	135 (82.3%)	79 (48.2%)	0 (0%)	26 (15.9%)	30 (18.3%)

Of course, sex always rears its lovely head, but copulating with the prosecutor in the judge's chambers, or trying to make a date from the bench with the cutie standing before the bar does seem to exceed the limits of propriety. On the EJF web site in the Colorado Judges — Citizen's Review chapter we have documented all of those behaviors, and more, by one or more judges. Further, politics, religion, and ideology have no place in a fair and impartial courtroom and a judge's ruling must not be based on emotions and feelings.

Note that magistrates serve at the pleasure of the chief judge of the judicial district and are not considered state judges. Thus, they are not evaluated here but are included on our website.

Our objective with these reports is to support the many outstanding judges who serve Colorado citizens while helping voters decide to eliminate those who are unfit for the position they hold. The basic assumption we've made is that the prosecutors, defense, and civil litigation attorneys know the judges in their judicial district best. They are the ones who deal with the judges on a daily basis and have the education and experience to judge the judges. As a result, the Equal Justice Foundation evaluation is based entirely on how these attorneys voted on a particular judge; a simple and easily understood metric that is reasonably consistent across the state. In essence, attorneys are a jury of the judge's peers.

The commissions collect more data than just attorney votes but seldom rule against judges. In 2022, of 135 judges actually standing for retention, the political appointees of the various commissions ruled that all of the state's judges met acceptable performance standards. Commissions where everyone meets the standards effectively have no standards at all.

But it is of note that even then 29 judges didn't want to be bothered and stepped down or retired.

As a general rule, in any large organization it is reasonable to expect that roughly 10% of the individuals in the organization will be incompetent, drunkards, mentally or physically unfit, crooks, or otherwise unsuitable. Using attorney ratings we suggest there are currently 24 (18%) judges who should not be retained, of the 135 who are standing for retention. But, by the same metrics, attorneys rank 36 (27%) judges as outstanding.

If you would like to go sit in a judge's courtroom and form your own opinion we have courtwatcher forms available that should be of some assistance to you in that endeavor. We link appropriately completed courtwatcher forms to the judge's name on our web site.

However, the final decision is in the hands of the voters and we hope this document is a useful tool for helping them decide which jurists they want to keep on the bench and, more particularly, helping to remove those who have not met the high standards so essential for justice.

Support for the Equal Justice Foundation

Top

We would be amiss if we did not conclude with a plea for support for our work. The Equal Justice Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) public charity and contributions are tax deductible. It should be obvious that there are many costs to doing research like this on a continuing basis. However, the Foundation has no paid employees so all of your support goes into helping with the research and dissemination of same. We note with pride that during 2019 the research and stories on our web sites was accessed by an average 2,000 unique visitors a day by people in every state and at least 180 other countries. Our work is also commonly reposted on other sites all around the world as well.

It would be greatly appreciated if you would donate whatever you can online or by sending a check to the address given here. If interested in helping with our work, or joining the Foundation, that can be done online as well, or by printing and filling out the form linked there and mailing it to the address on the form together with a check or money order for your dues. Dues are just $25/year, which are not onerous, and there is strength in numbers.

Top

Issues The Equal Justice Foundation Deals With

| Courts, Veteran Courts, & Civil Liberties | Prohibition & War On Drugs | Vote Fraud & Election Issues |

EJF Newsletter — 2022 Review of Colorado Judges

Additional copies of this report in printable PDF format (13 pages) are available on the web.

2022 Colorado Judicial Performance Evaluations

EJF Evaluations Based On Attorney Judgments

Colorado Supreme Court

Colorado Court of Appeals

First Judicial District Judges (Gilpin, Jefferson)

Second Judicial District Judges (Denver County)

Third Judicial District Judges (Huerfano, Las Animas)

Fourth Judicial District Judges (El Paso, Teller)

Fifth Judicial District Judges (Clear Creek, Eagle, Lake, Summit)

Sixth Judicial District Judges (Archuleta, La Plata, San Juan)

Seventh Judicial District (Delta, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Montrose, Ouray, San Miguel)

Eighth Judicial District Judges (Jackson, Larimer)

Ninth Judicial District Judges (Garfield, Pitkin, Rio Blanco)

Tenth Judicial District Judges (Pueblo)

Eleventh Judicial District Judges (Chaffee, Custer, Fremont, Park)

Twelfth Judicial District Judges (Alamosa, Conejos, Costilla, Mineral, Rio Grande, Saguache)

No Logan County Judges stood for retention in 2022

Fourteenth Judicial District Judges (Grand, Moffat, Routt)

Do Not Retain

70%

Do Not Retain

Fifteenth Judicial District Judges (Baca, Cheyenne, Kiowa, Prowers)

Sixteenth Judicial District Judges (Bent, Crowley, Otero)

Seventeenth Judicial District Judges (Adams, Broomfield)

Eighteenth Judicial District Judges (Arapahoe, Douglas, Elbert, Lincoln)

Nineteenth Judicial District Judges (Weld)

Twentieth Judicial District Judges (Boulder)

Twenty-First Judicial District Judges (Mesa)

Twenty-Second Judicial District Judges (Dolores, Montezuma)

Notes

The table above is intended as brief reference to help voters decide how to vote on state judges in their judicial district who are standing for retention in November 2022.

Criteria

Retention intervals

Colorado judicial performance evaluation statistics based on stated criteria

Support for the Equal Justice Foundation

Issues The Equal Justice Foundation Deals With