Final Recommendation

The Honorable

Matthew J. Sandoval

District Court Judge
4th Judicial District --
Guadalupe, Mora, and San Miguel Counties

Year: 2014

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results: Retained

Evaluation: Overall, Judge Matthew Sandoval received generally positive ratings. Many of his scores among attorneys improved since his last evaluation in 2011. Attorneys rate him positively for being courteous to all participants, demonstrating appropriate demeanor on the bench, and for ensuring that his personal staff is professional, productive, and knowledgeable. However, some attorneys still feel that he is not thoroughly knowledgeable of substantive law and of the rules of procedure and evidence. In addition, some continue to feel that he does not always exercise sound legal reasoning. Among resource staff (e.g., law enforcement, probation and parole officers, interpreters, etc.) Judge Sandoval’s scores improved in most areas and are quite positive. Although this evaluation indicated some weaknesses, which were self-acknowledged, the judge expressed his commitment to maintaining and improving his overall judicial performance.

Experience & Education: Judge Matthew Sandoval was elected District Judge in November 2008. Judge Sandoval handles both criminal and civil cases. He received his undergraduate degree from New Mexico Highlands University in 1975 and his law degree from the University of New Mexico in 1990. Judge Sandoval’s prior experience involved criminal defense, personal injury, disability and government law. He served briefly as a city attorney for the city of Las Vegas, New Mexico.

PERCENTAGE THAT AGREE OR DISAGREE THAT THE JUDGE EXHIBITS POSITIVE QUALITIES IN EACH CATEGORY *

Attorneys (n=57, 40% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 84% 10% 5%
Fair and Impartial 86% 13% 1%
Knowledgeable of Law 58% 28% 14%
Communication is Clear 67% 31% 2%
Appropriate Demeanor 92% 7% 1%
Properly Controls Proceedings 91% 7% 2%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=20, 80% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 69% 19% 13%
Fair and Impartial N/A N/A N/A
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear N/A N/A N/A
Appropriate Demeanor N/A N/A N/A
Properly Controls Proceedings N/A N/A N/A
Respects Court Employees 75% 13% 13%
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 85% 12% 3%
Fair and Impartial 79% 17% 4%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 76% 15% 9%
Appropriate Demeanor 82% 15% 3%
Properly Controls Proceedings 91% 6% 3%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A

* On the tables above, the "Agree" columns are comprised of the strongly agree and agree responses. Similarly, the "Disagree" columns are comprised of the strongly disagree and disagree responses. The combined percentage of "Agree", "Disagree", and "Partly Agree/Partly Disagree" for each category may not equal 100% due to rounding error. "N/A" indicates that the category is "not applicable" because some populations were not asked certain questions.

 

PERCENTAGE THAT RECOMMEND THE JUDGE BE RETAINED OR NOT BE RETAINED IN OFFICE. ‡

‡ On the charts above, the "Retain" columns are comprised of the strongly recommend retain and somewhat recommend retain responses. Similarly, the "Do Not Retain" columns are comprised of the strongly recommend not retain and somewhat recommend not retain responses.

 

Back to top