Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
!<ARC R . H .. DE
LEGAL COUN. .L
EDW.... D M . M"CON
JUDICIAL SERVICES
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
FISCAL SERVlCD
JOHN B . RICKMAN, DIRECTOR
OFFICE
OF
100
HUMAN RE80URCES
RENte:: FLEMING MILLS, DIRECTOR
THE
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
NORTH
NINTH
STREET
23219-2334
(804) 786-6455
RICHMOND,
MAGISTRATE SERVICES
MASON L. BYRD, DIRECTOR
VIRGINIA
December 1, 2016
Re:
The attached document includes the evaluation reports prepared for judges, listed below,
who are eligible for reelection during the 2017 session ofthe General Assembly. These judges
each have had at least one interim evaluation conducted during their terms.
(MKF)
If you have any questions concerning this document, please do not hesitate to contact me.
With kind regards, I am
Very truly yours,
Karl R. Hade
Attachment
cc:
Please note that each judge's evaluation is unique, and is not directly comparable to other
judges' evaluation reports.
Here are some factors you may wish to consider:
Due to the nature of the court there are different respondent groups for different types of
court.
o
General District Court judges and Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court judges
were evaluated only by attorneys.
Circuit Court judges were evaluated by jurors in addition to attorneys; however, some
judges did not receive any juror survey responses -- either because no jury trials were
conducted during the relevant time period, or the jurors chose not to respond. When
applicable, the juror responses were submitted with attorney responses.
For Circuit Court judges, respondents are asked to rate the judge based on experiences with
the judge during the previous three years. For District Court judges, respondents are asked
to rate the judge based on experiences with the judge during the previous one year.
Efforts are made to survey a large number of individuals; however, this is a voluntary
process. While the responses received are not necessarily representative of all potential
respondents, each judge's report accurately reflects the actual responses received for that
judge.
Judges receive evaluations from attorneys who have appeared before the specific judge.
Thus, the judges within a single circuit or district may be evaluated by different attorneys,
and there will be individual differences in how attorneys rate judges. Also, there may be
regional differences in how groups of attorneys tend to rate judges.
The number of attorneys surveyed is not uniform. Generally, there are fewer attorneys to
survey for judges who preside in rural areas. Each judge's report lists how many total
surveys were completed for that judge.
For judges who have a very high number of potential attorney respondents, only a sample of
those respondents is surveyed (approximately 250). For judges in more rural jurisdictions, all
identified eligible attorneys may be surveyed ifthere are less than 250 potential respondents
identified.
In order to be eligible to complete an evaluation, an attorney must have appeared before the
evaluated judge at least one time in the applicable time period.
Some sit every day in one location; others travel to several different courts during the
week.
Judges in different districts or circuits may hear very different types of cases. Even
within a single district or circuit, some judges may hear a certain type of case (i.e.,
criminal) more than other judges do.
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
71
58
44.9%
36.7%
25
15.8%
Rarely
2.5%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
100
44
62.5%
27.5%
15
9.4%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
108
38
69.2%
5.8%
0.6%
0.0%
100
64.5%
46
29.7%
4.5%
2
0
1.3%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
24.4%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
103
65.2%
Frequently
38
24.1%
15
9.5%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.0%
119
33
75.8%
21.0%
2.6%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
124
78.0%
Frequently
29
18.2%
2.5%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
98
43
61.6%
27.0%
15
9.4%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
105
66.0%
Frequently
40
25.2%
11
6.9%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
111
26
78.7%
18.4%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Never
Every Time
Frequently
0.7%
122
29
79.2%
18.8%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
125
31
79.1%
19.6%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
0.6%
0.6%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
89
44
57.4%
28.4%
17
11.0%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
1.3%
Every Time
Frequently
91
48
58.0%
30.6%
12
7.6%
Rarely
3.2%
Never
0.6%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
94
48
59.9%
30.6%
13
8.3%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
100
36
64.1%
23.1%
16
10.3%
Rarely
2.6%
Never
0.0%
103
29
66.5%
18.7%
19
12.3%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
99
41
62.7%
26.0%
13
8.2%
Rarely
2.5%
Never
0.6%
111
38
69.8%
23.9%
3.8%
2.5%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
105
43
66.9%
27.4%
4.5%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
101
40
63.9%
25.3%
13
8.2%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
1.3%
Excellent
Good
86
54
54.4%
34.2%
Needs Improvement
14
8.9%
Unsatisfactory
2.5%
19
15.2%
2.4%
103
82.4%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
149
26
84.2%
14.7%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
157
20
88.7%
11.3%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
137
15
89.5%
0.7%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
136
88.9%
17
11.1%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
9.8%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
160
16
90.4%
9.0%
0.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
145
23
85.8%
13.6%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
0.0%
Never
0.0%
159
17
90.3%
9.7%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
153
22
86.4%
12.4%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
148
24
84.6%
13.7%
1.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
0.6%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
132
93.0%
Frequently
6.3%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
139
90.9%
Frequently
14
9.2%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
158
91.9%
14
8.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
121
80.7%
Frequently
28
18.7%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
0.7%
0.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
132
86.3%
Frequently
19
12.4%
1.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
5
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
135
88.2%
Frequently
15
9.8%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
133
86.4%
Frequently
21
13.6%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
131
87.3%
Frequently
19
12.7%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
155
88.1%
Frequently
19
10.8%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
160
90.9%
13
7.4%
1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
139
79.0%
Frequently
35
19.9%
l.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
150
84.8%
Frequently
25
14.l%
l.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
163
89.6%
Good
19
10.4%
Needs Improvement
0.0%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
21
16.5%
0.0%
106
83.5%
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
126
35
75.5%
21.0%
3.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
139
24
83.7%
14.5%
1.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
117
28
77.0%
4.0%
Rarely
Never
0
1
0.0%
0.7%
119
78.8%
25
16.6%
4.6%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
18.4%
3
2016
Number
Percent
136
22
82.4%
13.3%
3.6%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
129
27
79.1%
16.6%
3.1%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
139
22
83.2%
13.2%
3.0%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
129
26
77.3%
15.6%
5.4%
Rarely
1.8%
Never
0.0%
131
23
78.4%
13.8%
5.4%
Rarely
2.4%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
2016
EV~lluation
Summary
Survey Responses
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
115
14
82.7%
10.1%
5.0%
Rarely
2.2%
Never
0.0%
116
27
76.8%
17.9%
4.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
136
20
82.4%
12.1%
4.9%
0.0%
0.6%
121
20
80.1%
13.3%
6.0%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
109
25
71.2%
16.3%
14
9.2%
Rarely
3.3%
Never
0.0%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every T ime
Frequently
110
22
71.9%
14.4%
16
10.5%
Rarely
3.3%
Never
0.0%
114
31
74.5%
20.3%
4.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.7%
119
26
77.8%
17.0%
4.6%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
126
29
76.4%
17.6%
4.9%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
132
24
79.0%
14.4%
4.2%
1.2%
1.2%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge communicates effectively
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
112
43
67.5%
25.9%
5.4%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
120
31
73.6%
19.0%
10
6.1%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
117
33
71.8%
20.3%
Needs Improvement
11
6.8%
Unsatisfactory
1.2%
19
17.3%
1.8%
89
80.9%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2016
Number
Percent
137
27
82.5%
16.3%
1.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
151
15
91.0%
9.0%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
138
18
86.8%
1.9%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
134
83.8%
18
11.3%
5.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
11.3%
3
2016
Number
Percent
150
89.8%
16
9.6%
0.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
141
21
86.5%
12.9%
0.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
140
24
84.3%
14.5%
1.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
142
18
86.1%
10.9%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
143
16
86.7%
9.7%
3.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
125
87.4%
Frequently
13
9.1%
2.8%
Rarely
0.7%
0
0.0%
Every Time
134
85.4%
Frequently
22
14.0%
Never
0.0%
Never
0.0%
145
87.4%
20
12.1%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
0.6%
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
135
86.0%
Frequently
18
11.5%
1.9%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
129
80.6%
Frequently
24
15.0%
3.8%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
Never
0.6%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
125
78.l%
Frequently
29
18.l%
3.l%
Rarely
Never
0.6%
0
0.0%
Every Time
134
84.3%
Frequently
19
12.0%
3.l%
Rarely
0.6%
0
0.0%
Every Time
116
72.5%
Frequently
31
19.4%
12
7.5%
0.0%
Never
0.6%
EvelY Time
138
83.6%
Frequently
18
10.9%
5.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
143
88.3%
Frequently
13
8.0%
3.1%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
6
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
109
66.9%
Frequently
44
27.0%
5.5%
0.6%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
Every Time
109
67.3%
Frequently
32
19.8%
17
10.5%
Rarely
1.9%
0.6%
Never
Excellent
140
85.4%
Good
18
11.0%
Needs Improvement
3.7%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
15
11.6%
0.8%
113
87.6%
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
115
30
75.7%
19.7%
4.0%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
125
20
82.2%
13.2%
4.6%
Rarely
0
0
0.0%
112
27
76.2%
18.4%
4.1%
Rarely
Never
2
0
1.4%
0.0%
113
77.4%
26
17.8%
2.7%
3
0
2.1%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
0.0%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
126
Frequently
20
82.9%
13.2%
3.3%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
126
21
84.0%
14.0%
1.3%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
0.0%
126
21
82.9%
13.8%
1.3%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.7%
120
24
79.5%
15.9%
3.3%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.0%
116
26
77.3%
17.3%
4.0%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.0%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
0.7%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
115
15
87.1%
11.4%
1.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
124
18
84.9%
12.3%
2.1%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Rarely
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
Every Time
Frequently
Thejudge allows lawyers appropriate
latitude in presentation of their case
0.7%
129
17
86.0%
11.3%
2.7%
0.0%
0.0%
113
26
77.4%
17.8%
3.4%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
97
35
66.0%
23.8%
12
8.2%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.7%
5
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
99
38
67.4%
25.9%
5.4%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge communicates effectively
114
26
77.6%
17.7%
2.7%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
0.0%
119
20
82.6%
13.9%
2.1%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
110
35
72.4%
23.0%
3.3%
Rarely
1.3%
Never
0.0%
113
26
76.4%
17.6%
4.7%
1.4%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
2016
Percent
110
29
74.3%
19.6%
5.4%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
113
26
76.9%
17.7%
4.1%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
0.7%
Never
0.7%
Excellent
Good
106
38
70.7%
25.3%
Needs Improvement
2.7%
Unsatisfactory
1.3%
18
16.2%
1.8%
91
82.0%
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
100
44
65.8%
29.0%
3.3%
Rarely
1.3%
Every Time
Frequently
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in'the courtroom
121
26
79.6%
17.1%
3.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
111
23
77.6%
4.9%
Rarely
Never
2
0
1.4%
0.0%
112
78.3%
20
14.0%
10
7.0%
1
0
0.7%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
16.1%
3
2016
valuation Summary
Survey Responses
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
125
82.8%
Frequently
15
9.9%
11
7.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
117
23
81.3%
16.0%
1.4%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
113
34
74.3%
22.4%
2.6%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
115
22
76.2%
14.6%
10
6.6%
Rarely
2.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
119
17
78.8%
11.3%
12
8.0%
Ral:ely
2.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
4
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
108
13
87.1%
10.5%
2.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
123
16
87.2%
1l.4%
0.7%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
133
14
87.5%
9.2%
2.6%
0.7%
0.0%
109
24
76.8%
16.9%
6.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
106
27
74.1%
18.9%
5.6%
Every T ime
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge allows lawyers appropriate
latitude in presentation of their case
Every Time
Frequently
The judge displays knowledge of the law
0.7%
Never
0.7%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
99
29
69.7%
20.4%
12
8.5%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge communicates effectively
0.7%
114
21
79.7%
14.7%
4.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
114
24
80.3%
16.9%
2.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
117
28
77.0%
18.4%
4.0%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
117
20
78.5%
13.4%
4.7%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
1.3%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
bias or prejudice
0.7%
2016
Percent
106
38
71.6%
25.7%
2.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
119
24
79.3%
16.0%
4.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
117
23
78.0%
15.3%
Needs Improvement
4.7%
Unsatisfactory
2.0%
5.7%
2.4%
114
91.9%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
Excellent
Good
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf ofthe
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Every Time
Frequently
Some of the Time
Number
Percent
109
39
69.4%
24.8%
5.1%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
123
30
78.3%
19.1%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
109
15
82.6%
11.4%
3.8%
Rarely
Never
1.5%
0.8%
105
79.6%
20
15.2%
3.8%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
0.6%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
0.8%
0.8%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
129
Frequently
24
82.2%
15.3%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
117
24
80.1%
16.4%
2.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the. proceedings
134
22
85.4%
14.0%
0.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
122
26
77.7%
16.6%
5.1%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
123
26
78.3%
16.6%
4.5%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
0.7%
0.6%
0
0.0%
4
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
95
17
81.2%
14.5%
4.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
109
19
84.5%
14.7%
0.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
129
22
83.8%
14.3%
2.0%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
88
32
68.2%
24.8%
6.2%
Rarely
0.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
95
28
72.0%
21.2%
6.1%
Rarely
0.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Bvery Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
2016
Performance Factor
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is faithful to the law
Number
Percent
96
26
73.3%
19.9%
6.1%
0.8%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
98
26
74.2%
19.7%
5.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.8%
96
27
73.3%
20.6%
3.l%
2.3%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Rarely
0.8%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
119
31
76.8%
20.0%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.7%
125
22
81.2%
14.3%
4.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
bias or prejudice
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
116
35
74.8%
22.6%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
123
30
78.9%
19.2%
1.3%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
0.6%
Rarely
Never
Excellent
Good
Needs Improvement
0.0%
131
17
83.4%
10.8%
5.1%
Unsatisfactory
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
0.6%
12
12.1%
4.0%
83
83.8%
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Number
Percent
134
35
76.1%
19.9%
4.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
158
15
89.8%
8.5%
1.7%
Rarely
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
92
18
76.7%
6.7%
Rarely
Never
2
0
1.7%
0.0%
Every Time
83
69.8%
25
21.0%
7.6%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
15.0%
0.8%
0.8%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
158
14
89.8%
8.0%
1.1%
Rarely
0.6%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
140
20
83.8%
12.0%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
1.2%
139
30
78.5%
17.0%
2.8%
Rarely
1.1%
Never
0.6%
153
18
86.9%
10.2%
1.1%
Rarely
1.1%
Never
0.6%
155
16
87.6%
9.0%
2.3%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
0.6%
0.6%
Never
0.6%
2016
Number
Percent
93
4
93.9%
4.0%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
1.0%
102
14
86.4%
11.9%
1.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
156
14
89.7%
8.1%
1.7%
0.0%
0.6%
Every Time
Frequently
81
25
70.4%
21.7%
6.1%
Rarely
1.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
86
25
71.7%
20.8%
5.0%
Rarely
2.5%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
5
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
88
25
73.3%
20.8%
3.3%
Rarely
2.5%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
88
27
74.0%
22.7%
1.7%
Rarely
0.8%
Never
0.8%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
6.9%
0.9%
Never
0.9%
137
28
79.2%
16.2%
3.5%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.6%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
bias or prejudice
67.2%
24.1%
Rarely
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
78
28
154
13
89.5%
7.6%
1.7%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.6%
6
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
85
47
48.9%
27.0%
31
17.8%
Rarely
4.0%
Never
2.3%
113
45
65.7%
26.2%
5.2%
Rarely
1.7%
Never
1.2%
138
33
78.4%
18.8%
Needs Improvement
1.7%
Unsatisfactory
1.1%
8.3%
2.1%
87
89.7%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
Excellent
Good
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
98
53
59.4%
32.1%
12
7.3%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
119
37
72.1%
22.4%
4.2%
Rarely
Never
2
0
1.2%
0.0%
104
31
75.4%
22.5%
2.2%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
106
76.8%
28
20.3%
2.2%
1
0
0.7%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
130
28
78.3%
16.9%
2.4%
Rarely
2.4%
Never
0.0%
116
31
76.3%
20.4%
2.6%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
138
23
83.1%
13.9%
2.4%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
126
28
76.4%
17.0%
4.9%
Rarely
1.8%
Never
0.0%
127
27
77.4%
16.5%
4.3%
Rarely
1.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
Every T ime
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
101
17
84.9%
14.3%
0.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
104
30
77.6%
22.4%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
131
29
81.4%
18.0%
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
87
37
64.9%
27.6%
6.7%
Rarely
0.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
81
33
60.5%
24.6%
18
13.4%
Rarely
0.8%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
Never
0.8%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
88
29
65.2%
21.5%
16
11.9%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
91
32
66.9%
23.5%
10
7.4%
Rarely
2.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
87
35
65.4%
26.3%
6.8%
Rarely
1.5%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
120
30
72.7%
18.2%
13
7.9%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.6%
132
20
82.0%
12.4%
3.7%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
bias or prejudice
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
113
41
72.9%
26.5%
0.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
113
43
69.8%
26.5%
1.9%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
115
38
69.3%
22.9%
Needs Improvement
11
6.6%
Unsatisfactory
1.2%
21
20.2%
1.9%
81
77.9%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Performance Factor
i~
the
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
60
61
39.0%
39.6%
28
18.2%
Rarely
3.3%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
82
50
52.9%
32.3%
17
11.0%
Rarely
3.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
63.4%
Frequently
90
38
26.8%
11
7.8%
Rarely
Never
3
0
2.1%
0.0%
92
65.7%
36
25.7%
6.4%
3
0
2.1%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
89
Frequently
40
57.4%
25.8%
16
10.3%
Rarely
5.2%
Never
1.3%
Every Time
Frequently
92
40
64.3%
28.0%
6.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
1.4%
105
40
67.7%
25.8%
5.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
90
42
58.4%
27.3%
15
9.7%
Rarely
3.9%
0.7%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
91
37
59.5%
24.2%
17
11.1 %
Rarely
4.6%
Never
0.7%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
87
76.3%
Frequently
23
20.2%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.9%
Every Time
104
72.7%
Frequently
36
25.2%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
113
74.8%
35
23.2%
1.3%
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
0.7%
Every Time
75
53.6%
Frequently
42
30.0%
18
12.9%
Rarely
3.6%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
80
56.3%
Frequently
41
28.9%
16
11.3%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
0.0%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
83
58.0%
Frequently
39
27.3%
18
12.6%
Rarely
2.l%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
92
63.9%
Frequently
35
24.3%
15
10.4%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
86
62.8%
Frequently
45
32.9%
3.7%
0.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
92
6l.7%
Frequently
42
28.2%
12
8.l%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
96
64.0%
37
24.7%
10
6.7%
4.0%
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
0.7%
6
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
102
67.6%
Frequently
46
30.5%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
100
65.8%
Frequently
41
27.0%
5.3%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
85
55.6%
Good
48
31.4%
Needs Improvement
15
9.8%
Unsatisfactory
3.3%
11
10.0%
4.6%
94
85.5%
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
77
32
67.0%
27.8%
4.4%
Rarely
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
91
21
79.1%
18.3%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
79
18
80.6%
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
18.4%
1.0%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
78
79.6%
20
20.4%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
88
Frequently
24
76.5%
20.9%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
86
19
78.9%
17.4%
2.8%
Rarely
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
95
18
81.9%
15.5%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
90
18
77.6%
15.5%
6.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Ti me
Frequently
89
21
76.7%
18.1%
5.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
4
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
72
16
80.9%
18.0%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
82
15
83.7%
15.3%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
95
17
82.6%
14.8%
1.7%
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
71
23
71.7%
23.2%
5.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
69
26
69.7%
26.3%
4.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
2016
Number
Percent
EvelY Time
Frequently
71
22
71.7%
22.2%
6.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
72
24
72.7%
24.2%
2.0%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
73
22
75.3%
22.7%
1.0%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
89
18
77.4%
15.7%
6.1%
Rarely
1
0
0.9%
91
16
80.5%
14.2%
5.3%
0.0%
0.0%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
0.0%
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
94
20
81.7%
17.4%
0.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
EvelY T ime
Frequently
91
19
79.8%
16.7%
2.6%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
0.9%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
86
25
74.1%
21.6%
Needs Improvement
4.3%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
Better
10.4%
Worse
1.3%
68
88.3%
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
121
38
73.3%
23.0%
3.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
128
35
76.7%
2l.0%
2.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
135
23
83.9%
l.9%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
131
8l.4%
27
16.8%
l.9%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
14.3%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
138
Frequently
24
82.6%
14.4%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
121
38
75.2%
23.6%
1.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
143
23
85.6%
13.8%
EvelY Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
0.0%
Never
0.0%
130
28
78.3%
16.9%
4.2%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
132
26
80.0%
15.8%
3.6%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
0.6%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
132
15
89.2%
10.1%
0.0%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
137
23
85.6%
14.4%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
142
21
86.6%
12.8%
EvelY Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
0.0%
0.0%
123
35
75.9%
21.6%
2.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
124
36
76.5%
22.2%
0.6%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge allows lawyers appropriate
latitude in presentation of their case
Every Time
Frequently
The judge displays knowledge of the law
0.6%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
123
31
75.9%
19.1%
4.3%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
129
31
79.6%
19.1%
1.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
127
32
79.4%
20.0%
0.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
132
32
79.0%
19.2%
1.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
139
20
84.2%
12.1%
2.4%
1.2%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is faithful to the law
Every Time
Frequently
The judge communicates effectively
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
119
43
72.1%
26.1%
1.2%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
132
30
80.0%
18.2%
1.2%
Rarely
0.6%
Never
0.0%
137
23
83.0%
13.9%
Needs Improvement
1.8%
Unsatisfactory
1.2%
5.4%
2.3%
120
92.3%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
Excellent
Good
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Performance Factor
Every Time
Frequently
Percent
108
7
93.1%
6.0%
0.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
115
2
98.3%
1.7%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
93
8
89.4%
7.7%
1.9%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
1.0%
Every Time
89
86.4%
10
9.7%
3.9%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Number
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
115
95.8%
Frequently
3.3%
0.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
104
9
92.0%
8.0%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
109
10
90.8%
8.3%
0.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
ll4
4
95.0%
3.3%
1.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
llO
8
91.7%
6.7%
1.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
92
5
93.9%
5.1%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
EvelY Time
Frequently
94
8
92.2%
7.8%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
III
94.1%
5.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
90
11
89.1%
10.9%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
86
13
83.5%
12.6%
3.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
1.0%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
EvelY T ime
Frequently
89
10
86.4%
9.7%
3.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
90
11
86.5%
10.6%
2.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Ever), Time
Frequently
83
11
82.2%
10.9%
4.0%
Rarely
3.0%
Never
0.0%
105
10
88.2%
8.4%
3.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
115
3
95.8%
2.5%
1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
95
21
80.5%
17.8%
1.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
104
12
88.9%
10.3%
0.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
107
11
89.2%
9.2%
Needs Improvement
1.7%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
11
12.8%
0.0%
75
87.2%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
Excellent
Good
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Number
Percent
125
15
86.8%
10.4%
2.l%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
134
9
92.4%
6.2%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
0.7%
Never
0.0%
123
12
87.2%
8.5%
2.1%
0.7%
1.4%
119
85.0%
12
8.6%
4.3%
1.4%
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
127
88.2%
Frequently
11
7.6%
4.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
103
21
77.4%
15.8%
4.5%
Rarely
1.5%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
86.9%
7.6%
4.1%
0.7%
Never
0.7%
122
12
84.1%
8.3%
4.8%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
2.1%
120
14
82.8%
9.7%
4.8%
Rarely
2.1%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
126
11
Rarely
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
0.8%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
104
91.2%
Frequently
6.1%
1.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.9%
Every Time
111
80.4%
Frequently
23
16.7%
2.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
107
77.5%
22
15.9%
5.1%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
108
80.0%
Frequently
18
13.3%
3.7%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
2.2%
Every Time
105
75.5%
Frequently
24
17.3%
5.8%
Rarely
Never
0.7%
1
0.7%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
103
74.1%
Frequently
21
15.1%
12
8.6%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
1.4%
Every T ime
100
71.4%
Frequently
25
17.9%
13
9.3%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
EvelY Time
89
65.0%
Frequently
26
19.0%
18
13.1%
2.2%
0.7%
Every Time
96
67.6%
Frequently
31
2l.8%
12
8.5%
Rarely
1.4%
0.7%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
118
84.9%
13
9.4%
2.9%
2.2%
0.7%
6
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
99
71.2%
Frequently
29
20.9%
5.8%
Rarely
2.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
81
57.0%
Frequently
32
22.5%
24
16.9%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
111
76.6%
Good
25
17.2%
Needs Improvement
3.5%
Unsatisfactory
2.8%
18
16.8%
1.9%
87
81.3%
Better
In general, over the last three years, has the
Worse
judge's overall court-related performance
become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
75
18
77.3%
18.6%
3.1%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
82
12
84.5%
12.4%
3.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
84.5%
Frequently
82
13
2.1%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
83
85.6%
10
10.3%
3.1%
1
0
1.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
13.4%
3
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
82
Frequently
11
84.5%
11.3%
4.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
80
16
82.5%
16.5%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
86
8
88.7%
8.3%
3.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
77
15
80.2%
15.6%
4.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
81
12
83.5%
12.4%
4.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
87
4
95.6%
4.4%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
12
87.6%
12.4%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
84
12
87.5%
12.5%
0.0%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Evel)' Time
Frequently
80
12
82.5%
12.4%
4.1%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
69
15
71.1%
15.5%
10
10.3%
Rarely
2.1%
Never
1.0%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
very T ime
Frequently
71
16
73.2%
16.5%
8.3%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
1.0%
Every Time
Frequently
76
15
78.4%
15.5%
4.1%
Rarely
2.1%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
81
15
83.5%
15.5%
0.0%
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
79
14
81.4%
14.4%
3.1%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
79
14
81.4%
14.4%
4.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
2016
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Number
Percent
83
13
85.6%
13.4%
1.0%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
79
15
81.4%
15.5%
3.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
72
19
75.8%
20.0%
Needs Improvement
3.2%
Unsatisfactory
1.1%
11
12.6%
0.0%
76
87.4%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Number
Percent
110
23
80.9%
16.9%
2.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
120
14
88.2%
10.3%
1.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
115
17
85.2%
2.2%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
114
84.4%
20
14.8%
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
12.6%
0.7%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
3
2016
Percent
115
17
84.6%
12.5%
2.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
112
22
83.6%
16.4%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
121
12
89.6%
8.9%
1.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
110
18
81.5%
13.3%
4.4%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
112
13
83.6%
9.7%
6.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
0.8%
0
0.0%
4
2016
Number
Percent
103
10
89.6%
8.7%
1.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
123
13
90.4%
9.6%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
ll8
17
87.4%
12.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
117
15
86.0%
11.0%
2.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
107
22
78.7%
16.2%
5.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge allows lawyers appropriate
latitude in presentation of their case
Every Time
Frequently
The judge displays knowledge of the law
5
2016
Performance Factor
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is faithful to the law
Number
Percent
109
20
80.2%
14.7%
4.4%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
117
17
86.0%
12.5%
1.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
123
13
90.4%
9.6%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
124
9
91.2%
6.6%
1.5%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
113
16
83.7%
11.9%
3.7%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge communicates effectively
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
bias or prejudice
0.7%
6
2016
Performance Factor
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Percent
98
33
73.7%
24.8%
0.8%
Rarely
0.8%
Never
0.0%
107
23
81.1%
17.4%
1.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
110
21
82.1%
15.7%
Needs Improvement
2.2%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
13
10.4%
2.4%
109
87.2%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
Number
Excellent
Good
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
.
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
67
28
67.0%
28.0%
5.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
80
18
80.8%
18.2%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
81.6%
Frequently
80
15
2.0%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
1.0%
Every Time
79
81.4%
16
16.5%
1.0%
1
0
1.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
15.3%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
74
Frequently
20
74.8%
20.2%
5.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
69
27
71.9%
28.1%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
81
15
81.8%
15.2%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
71
20
71.0%
20.0%
8.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
1.0%
Every Time
Frequently
68
22
68.7%
22.2%
7.1%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
1.0%
2016
Number
Percent
72
11
84.7%
12.9%
1.2%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
88
11
88.0%
11.0%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
82
15
83.7%
15.3%
0.0%
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
62
29
62.6%
29.3%
6.1%
1.0%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
1.0%
Every Time
Frequently
68
23
68.7%
23.2%
6.1%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
1.0%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
67
24
67.7%
24.2%
5.1%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
1.0%
Every Time
Frequently
78
16
78.8%
16.2%
4.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
79
19
79.8%
19.2%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
77
20
77.8%
20.2%
1.0%
1.0%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
75
13
77.3%
13.4%
6.2%
2.1%
1.0%
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
76
24
76.0%
24.0%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
80
19
80.8%
19.2%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
68
26
68.7%
26.3%
Needs Improvement
3.0%
Unsatisfactory
2.0%
Better
6.9%
Worse
2.3%
79
90.8%
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
65
40
55.6%
34.2%
11
9.4%
Rarely
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
77
28
65.8%
23.9%
12
10.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
70.9%
Frequently
83
30
25.6%
1.7%
Rarely
Never
2
0
1.7%
0.0%
Every Time
88
75.2%
27
23.1%
0.0%
2
0
1.7%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
3
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
79
68.1%
Frequently
20
17.2%
13
11.2%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
86
24
74.8%
20.9%
4.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
93
21
79.5%
18.0%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
71
25
61.7%
21.7%
15
13.0%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
72
26
62.6%
22.6%
12
10.4%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
0.9%
4
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
73
20
73.0%
20.0%
5.0%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
1.0%
99
17
84.6%
14.5%
0.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
95
20
81.9%
17.2%
0.9%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
67
32
58.8%
28.1%
11
9.7%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
83
26
71.6%
22.4%
4.3%
Rarely
1.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
EvelY Time
Frequently
74
33
64.4%
28.7%
5.2%
Rarely
1.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
78
32
66.7%
27.4%
6.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
93
23
80.2%
19.8%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
27
73.3%
23.3%
3.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
74
24
63.8%
20.7%
13
11.2%
Rarely
4.3%
Never
0.0%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
96
19
82.1%
16.2%
1.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
90
24
76.9%
20.5%
2.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
64
35
55.7%
30.4%
Needs Improvement
15
13.0%
Unsatisfactory
0.9%
19
20.4%
2.2%
72
77.4%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
124
14
86.7%
9.8%
2.8%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
130
9
90.9%
6.3%
2.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
127
11
89.4%
2.1%
0.7%
0.0%
126
88.1%
14
9.8%
1.4%
0.7%
0.0%
very T ime
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is conscientious in the
performance of judicial duties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
7.8%
2016
Survey Responses
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
128
89.5%
11
7.7%
2.1%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
115
25
80.4%
17.5%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
126
15
88.1%
10.5%
1.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
119
17
84.4%
12.1%
2.1%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
121
17
85.2%
12.0%
1.4%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
Every Time
Frequently
The judge requires court participants to
display respect toward one another
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is attentive to the proceedings
Every Time
Frequently
The judge exhibits fairness to all parties
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
2016
Performance Factor
Every T ime
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
118
15
86.8%
11.0%
0.7%
0.7%
Never
0.7%
119
21
83.2%
14.7%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
122
19
85.3%
13.3%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
118
21
82.5%
14.7%
1.4%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
121
17
84.6%
11.9%
2.8%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
Never
Every Time
Frequently
Every Time
Frequently
The judge displays knowledge of the law
Percent
Rarely
Every Time
Frequently
Number
2016
Number
Percent
119
15
84.4%
10.6%
4.3%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
124
15
86.7%
10.5%
1.4%
Rarely
1.4%
Never
0.0%
123
17
86.0%
11.9%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
122
17
85.3%
11.9%
2.1%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
119
15
86.2%
10.9%
1.5%
1.5%
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
The judge is faithful to the law
Every Time
Frequently
The judge communicates effectively
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
121
18
85.2%
12.7%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
113
23
80.1%
16.3%
2.8%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
0.0%
125
14
87.4%
9.8%
Needs Improvement
2.8%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
5.9%
0.0%
127
94.1%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge starts court on time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
Excellent
Good
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf ofthe
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
62
26
62.6%
26.3%
9.1%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
0.0%
EvelY Time
Frequently
67
24
67.7%
24.2%
8.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
64.7%
Frequently
64
28
28.3%
5.1%
Rarely
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
1.0%
1.0%
63
63.6%
30
30.3%
3.0%
2.0%
1.0%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
64
23
64.7%
23.2%
9.1%
Rarely
3.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
63
30
63.6%
30.3%
6.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
69
25
69.7%
25.3%
3.0%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
1.0%
Every Time
Frequently
55
31
55.6%
31.3%
10
10.1%
Rarely
3.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
56
26
56.6%
26.3%
14
14.1%
Rarely
3.0%
Never
0.0%
2016
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
68
25
72.3%
26.6%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
75
23
75.8%
23.2%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
76
21
76.8%
21.2%
2.0%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
57
27
57.6%
27.3%
9.1%
Rarely
3.0%
Never
3.0%
Every Time
Frequently
66
24
66.7%
24.2%
7.1%
Rarely
1.0%
Percent
Number
Never
1.0%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Frequently
55
32
56.1%
32.7%
8.2%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
1.0%
Every Time
Frequently
65
32
65.7%
32.3%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
70
29
70.7%
29.3%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
64
32
65.3%
32.7%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
56
27
59.6%
28.7%
9.6%
2.1%
0.0%
Every Time
The judge is faithful to the law
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
64
29
67.4%
30.5%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
62
29
62.6%
29.3%
8.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
60
28
62.5%
29.2%
Needs Improvement
5.2%
Unsatisfactory
3.1%
6.2%
6.2%
71
87.7%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
66
43
47.5%
30.9%
24
17.3%
3.6%
Rarely
0.7%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
93
33
66.9%
23.7%
10
7.2%
Rarely
2.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
70.5%
Frequently
98
32
23.0%
5.8%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
0.7%
Every Time
92
67.2%
35
25.6%
5.8%
2
0
1.5%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
92
66.2%
30
21.6%
12
8.6%
Rarely
3.6%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
97
32
71.3%
23.5%
5.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
92
34
66.7%
24.6%
11
8.0%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
95
30
68.4%
21.6%
10
7.2%
Rarely
2.9%
Never
0.0%
101
23
72.7%
16.6%
6.5%
Rarely
4.3%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge treats all parties in an impartial
manner
0.7%
4
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
93
25
74.4%
20.0%
3.2%
Rarely
1.6%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
105
29
75.5%
20.9%
3.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
108
22
77.7%
15.8%
5.8%
0.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
74
39
53.6%
28.3%
19
13.8%
Rarely
3.6%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge expects professional behavior of
Some of the Time
court participants
Rarely
0.8%
Never
0.7%
Every Time
Frequently
98
32
71.5%
23.4%
4.4%
Rarely
1
0
0.7%
Never
0.0%
5
2016
ummary
Survey Responses
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every T ime
Frequently
94
30
69.1%
22.1%
6.6%
Rarely
2.2%
Never
0.0%
104
29
75.4%
21.0%
2.2%
Rarely
1.5%
Never
0.0%
107
26
78.7%
19.1%
2.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
106
29
76.3%
20.9%
2.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge communicates effectively
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is prompt in rendering decisions Some of the Time
Every Time
Frequently
The judge's decisions are clear
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
0.7%
99
23
72.8%
16.9%
5.9%
3.7%
0.7%
6
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
70
44
51.9%
32.6%
14
10.4%
Rarely
3.7%
Never
1.5%
EvelY Time
Frequently
97
31
70.3%
22.5%
10
7.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
89
37
65.4%
27.2%
Needs Improvement
5.2%
Unsatisfactory
2.2%
7.3%
5.5%
95
87.2%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
77
19
76.2%
18.8%
4.0%
Rarely
l.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
13
84.2%
12.9%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
88.0%
Frequently
88
12
0.0%
Rarely
0
0
0.0%
85
85.0%
15
15.0%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
~ever
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
12.0%
O . O~fo
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
83
Frequently
15
82.2%
14.9%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
87
12
86.1%
11.9%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
84
17
83.2%
16.8%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
87
12
86.1%
11.9%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
14
84.2%
13.9%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
4
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
80
11
85.1%
11.7%
2.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
88
13
87.1%
12.9%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
84
16
83.2%
15.8%
1.1%
1.0%
0
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
83
13
82.2%
12.9%
4.0%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
83
17
82.2%
16.8%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
76
22
76.0%
22.0%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
14
84.2%
13.9%
2.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
13
84.2%
12.9%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
84
14
83.2%
13.9%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
11
85.9%
11.1%
3.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
68
23
70.1%
23.7%
6.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
80
13
80.0%
13.0%
7.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
89
11
89.0%
11.0%
Needs Improvement
0.0%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
4.6%
1.1%
83
94.3%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
55
46
48.7%
40.7%
7.1%
Rarely
2.7%
Every Time
Frequently
0.9%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge is courteous in the courtroom
80
26
70.8%
23.0%
4.4%
Rarely
1.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
79.7%
Frequently
90
18
4.4%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
87
77.7%
21
18.8%
3.6%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
15.9%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
76
67.3%
Frequently
24
21.2%
10
8.9%
Rarely
2.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
22
76.6%
19.8%
3.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
93
16
82.3%
14.2%
3.5%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
78
22
69.6%
19.6%
8.0%
Rarely
2.7%
Never
0.0%
Every T ime
Frequently
77
23
68.1%
20.4%
10
8.9%
Rarely
2.7%
Never
0.0%
4
2016
Performance Factor
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
88
8
90.7%
8.3%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
97
15
85.8%
13.3%
0.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
93
18
83.8%
16.2%
0.0%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
72
30
63.7%
26.6%
7.1%
Rarely
2.7%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
81
26
71.7%
23.0%
3.5%
Rarely
1.8%
Never
0.0%
Percent
Number
5
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
81
21
71.7%
18.6%
10
8.9%
Rarely
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
85
25
75.2%
22.1%
1.8%
Rarely
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
95
15
84.1%
13.3%
1.8%
Rarely
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
87
22
77.0%
19.5%
2.7%
Rarely
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
85
17
75.9%
15.2%
8.0%
0.9%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
6
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
78
28
69.6%
25.0%
4.5%
0.9%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
89
19
78.8%
16.8%
4.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
77
27
68.8%
24.1%
Needs Improvement
6.3%
Unsatisfactory
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
0.9%
16
16.2%
l.0%
82
82.8%
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
51
26
62.2%
31.7%
6.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
66
14
79.5%
16.9%
3.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
79.3%
Frequently
65
14
3.7%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
68
81.9%
12
14.5%
2.4%
1
0
1.2%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
17.1%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
63
76.8%
14
17.1%
4.9%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
66
14
81.5%
17.3%
1.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
68
11
81.9%
13.3%
4.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
56
18
67.5%
21.7%
9.6%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
59
15
72.0%
18.3%
8.5%
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
70
7
89.7%
9.0%
1.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
74
8
90.2%
9.8%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
73
9
89.0%
11.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
57
16
68.7%
19.3%
10.8%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
Rarely
1.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
66
13
79.5%
15.7%
4.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
2016
Number
Percent
Every Ti me
Frequently
60
14
73.2%
17.1%
8.5%
Rarely
l.2%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
62
14
74.7%
16.9%
8.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
68
13
8l.9%
15.7%
2.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
63
14
76.8%
17.1%
6.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
64
13
79.0%
16.1%
3.7%
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
1.2%
0
0.0%
6
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
57
17
7l.3%
2l.3%
6.3%
Rarely
l.3%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
59
18
72.8%
22.2%
4.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
64
17
77.1%
20.5%
Needs Improvement
2.4%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
8.5%
0.0%
65
9l.6%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory
L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs
Virginia Commonwealth University
on behalf of the
Judicial Performance Evaluation Program
Supreme Court of Virginia
2016
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
76
25
72.4%
23.8%
2.9%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
87
13
82.9%
12.4%
4.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
79.1%
Frequently
83
17
3.8%
Rarely
Never
1.0%
0.0%
Every Time
84
80.0%
16
15.2%
3.8%
1
0
1.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
16.2%
3
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
90
Frequently
10
86.5%
9.6%
3.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
82
20
79.6%
19.4%
1.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
79
22
75.2%
21.0%
2.9%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
64
31
61.0%
29.5%
7.6%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
72
21
68.6%
20.0%
10
9.5%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.0%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
81
12
86.2%
12.8%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
77
24
73.3%
22.9%
3.8%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
77
24
74.0%
23.1%
2.9%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
71
25
67.6%
23.8%
6.7%
Rarely
1.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
67
26
63.8%
24.8%
7.6%
Rarely
3.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
69
24
65.7%
22.9%
6.7%
Rarely
4.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
64
30
61.0%
28.6%
10
9.5%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
78
25
74.3%
23.8%
1.9%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
very Ti me
Frequently
68
28
64.8%
26.7%
8.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
71
23
68.9%
22.3%
5.8%
2.9%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
57
34
55.9%
33.3%
8.8%
Rarely
2.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
51
33
50.0%
32.4%
12
11.8%
Rarely
5.9%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
73
23
68.9%
21.7%
Needs Improvement
6.6%
Unsatisfactory
2.8%
16
16.8%
0.0%
79
83.2%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2016
2
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
25
33
21.4%
28.2%
44
37.6%
Rarely
10
8.6%
Never
4.3%
Every Time
Frequently
36
35
30.8%
29.9%
33
28.2%
Rarely
6.8%
Never
4.3%
Every Time
53.5%
Frequently
62
33
28.5%
12
10.3%
Rarely
Never
6
3
5.2%
2.6%
Every Time
69
59.0%
25
21.4%
13
11.1%
6
4
5.1%
3.4%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
36
Frequently
36
30.8%
30.8%
26
22.2%
Rarely
13
11.1%
Never
5.1%
Every Time
Frequently
60
39
53.1%
34.5%
12
10.6%
Rarely
1.8%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
78
23
67.2%
19.8%
10
8.6%
Rarely
2.6%
Never
1.7%
Every Time
Frequently
46
31
39.7%
26.7%
25
21.6%
Rarely
5.2%
Never
6.9%
Every Time
Frequently
46
32
39.7%
27.6%
25
21.6%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
7.8%
4
2016
Number
Percent
Every T ime
Frequently
76
22
72.4%
21.0%
4.8%
Rarely
1.0%
Never
1.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge maintains order in the courtroom Some of the Time
1.8%
0.9%
Never
0.9%
86
24
75.4%
21.1%
2.6%
0.9%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
40
29
34.8%
25.2%
33
28.7%
Rarely
5.2%
Never
6.1%
EvelY Time
Frequently
60
29
51.7%
25 .0%
17
14.7%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
5.2%
71.9%
24.6%
Rarely
Every Time
Frequently
82
28
5
2016
Number
Percent
EvelY Time
Frequently
56
29
48.3%
25.0%
20
17.2%
Rarely
4.3%
Never
5.2%
Every Time
Frequently
60
32
51.7%
27.6%
17
14.7%
Rarely
6.0%
Never
0.0%
Eve!)' Time
Frequently
80
27
70.2%
23.7%
5.3%
0.9%
Rarely
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
68
33
59.1%
28.7%
11
9.6%
Rarely
1.7%
Never
Every Time
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
0.9%
53
30
46.1%
26.1%
17
14.8%.
5.2%
7.8%
6
2016
Performance Factor
Nnmber
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
54
39
47.4%
34.2%
13
11.4%
Rarely
7.0%
Never
0.0%
62
38
53.9%
33.0%
11
9.6%
Rarely
3.5%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
48
30
41.4%
25.9%
Needs Improvement
24
20.7%
Unsatisfactory
14
12.1%
Better
13
13.8%
Worse
7.5%
74
78.7%
Every Time
_ Frequently
The judge uses courtroom time efficiently
7
2016
Evaluation of:
Prepared by:
2
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
73
19
78.5%
20.4%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
83
10
89.3%
10.8%
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
79.4%
Frequently
73
15
4.4%
Rarely
Never
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Every Time
72
77.4%
16
17.2%
5.4%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge is diligent in the performance of
Some of the Time
judicial duties
Rarely
Never
16.3%
3
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
85
8
91.4%
8.6%
0.0%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
66
22
72.5%
24.2%
3.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
74
15
80.4%
16.3%
3.3%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
72
18
77.4%
19.4%
3.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
70
20
75.3%
21.5%
3.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
The judge shows respect for all court
participants
2016
Performance Factor
Every Time
Frequently
The judge avoids inappropriate ex parte
communications
78
6
91.8%
7.1%
1.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
EvelY Time
77
14
82.8%
15.1%
2.2%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
74
17
80.4%
18.5%
1.1%
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
73
19
78.5%
20.4%
1.1%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
67
18
72.0%
19.4%
7.5%
Percent
Frequently
Number
Rarely
Never
1.1%
0
0.0%
2016
Performance Factor
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
67
19
72.8%
20.7%
5.4%
Rarely
1.1%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
64
25
68.8%
26.9%
3.2%
Rarely
1.1%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
73
16
78.5%
17.2%
3.2%
1.1%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
68
17
73.1%
18.3%
8.6%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
76
14
83.5%
15.4%
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Frequently
The judge performs judicial duties without
Some of the Time
bias or prejudice
Rarely
Never
2016
Number
Percent
Every Time
Frequently
62
25
67.4%
27.2%
5.4%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Every Time
Frequently
60
24
65.9%
26.4%
7.7%
Rarely
0.0%
Never
0.0%
Excellent
Good
62
26
67.4%
28.3%
Needs Improvement
4.4%
Unsatisfactory
0.0%
6.3%
0.0%
74
93.7%
Better
In general, over the last twelve months, has
Worse
the judge's overall court-related
performance become ...
Stayed the Same
7
2016