When it comes to recommending Colorado judges for retention evaluators rarely know about disciplinary action

Bizar Male

The 10 members of the Second Judicial District Performance Commission have a list of 24 Denver judges whose work they must evaluate this year as part of routine reviews.

Over the next several months, the commissioners will interview lawyers, jury members, defendants, plaintiffs and even the judges themselves about those jurists’ performance in the courtroom. It’s part of the process for how Colorado evaluates judges and decides whether to keep them.

In 2022, the performance commission will recommend whether Denver voters should retain those judges or boot them from a courtroom. But there is one thing those commissioners will not have in making their recommendations: the judges’ records from the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline.

“I’ll ask, ‘Are any of these judges being investigated?’ All I’ll get is ‘yes or no,’” said Nelson P. Boyle, a Denver lawyer who is chairman of the Second Judicial District Performance Commission. “Really, it just makes our jobs harder trying to figure out who that was and whether it affects our recommendations.”

Colorado’s judicial disciplinary system is under scrutiny after the Colorado Supreme Court last month released a previously secret memo that cited multiple examples of sexual misconduct and harassment by judges, allegations that reached even the highest levels of the judicial branch.

The memo was released after The Denver Post reported Colorado court officials awarded a $2.5 million contract to a former human resources administrator who threatened to tell everything she knew about judicial misconduct. The contract has been dissolved.

The discipline proceedings for judges are so secretive that even those charged with evaluating judges’ work often do not have access to them. Under the state Constitution, investigations are confidential and any admonishment, reprimand or censure is privately issued.

Discipline remains private until the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline recommends it become public, and those instances are rare. It would take a statewide ballot measure to change that. Until then, Colorado remains among the most secretive states in the country when it comes to judicial misconduct.

There is a rule that allows the judicial discipline commission’s executive director to disclose a case if he feels it is within the state Constitution’s mandate, said William Campbell, the executive director.

“That’s a long way of saying if they ask us, we can tell them, but it’s on the condition they’re not going to quote us,” Campbell said. “They’re going to have to follow up on their own and get a response from the judge.”

In Colorado, judges are selected and retained through public commissions that are comprised of lawyers and non-lawyers. To become a judge, a nominating commission selects final candidates, who then are appointed by the governor. To remain a judge, performance commissions evaluate their work and then recommend whether voters should retain them or not through a yes or no vote. Statewide, 231 volunteers serve on performance commissions at the state and judicial district levels.

Kent Wagner, executive director of the Judicial Performance Commission, said he routinely asks the disciplinary commission whether there are proceedings against judges who up for retention. If he receives information about disciplinary action toward a judge, he forwards it to the state or district commissions.

“We don’t just necessarily rely on what they give us but we can use it if we can verify it,’” Wagner said. “We don’t get a lot. Obviously, there’s not a lot of complaints.”

The effort to evaluate judges for election retentions is time-consuming, Boyle said. In the run-up to the 2020 general election, Boyle estimated he spent about 200 hours evaluating judges through interviews, reading transcriptions and observing hearings on video. When he asks for judicial disciplinary information, it’s always a relief when the answer is no one on a retention list is under investigation or has a disciplinary record.

If his commission hears that a judge on the list has a record, then he and the other nine members start sleuthing to figure out who it is, he said. They also can directly ask a judge whether or not he has been disciplined.

Next Post

Bills to offer private school tax credit, limit teacher contract negotiations advance in North Dakota Legislature

The halfway point, known as the crossover, is when bills passed in the House go before the Senate, and bills passed in the Senate go before the House for consideration. To become law, a bill has to pass both legislative chambers. House Bill 1281, a proposal to offer an annual […]