Final Recommendation

The Honorable

William G. Shoobridge

District Court Judge
5th Judicial District --
Chaves, Eddy, and Lea Counties

Year: 2014

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results: Retained

Evaluation: Judge William Shoobridge's overall scores among the groups surveyed were positive. For example, attorneys rated him highly for ruling on motions or cases in a timely manner, being punctual in commencing proceedings, and for displaying familiarity with court cases through prior preparation. The court staff scored him highly for behaving in a manner that encourages respect for the courts. The resource staff (e.g., law enforcement, probation and parole officers, interpreters, etc.) rated him quite positively for his attentiveness to proceedings, being punctual in commencing proceedings, and displaying familiarity through prior preparation. Judge Shoobridge expressed his commitment to maintaining judicial excellence.

Experience & Education: Judge Shoobridge is the Chief Judge of the 5th Judicial District and works primarily in Lea County. He graduated from the University of Indiana Law School in 1974, was appointed to the bench in 2008 and presides over a mixed docket of civil and criminal cases. Prior to 2008, he practiced as a trial lawyer, a mediator and in employment-related law. At one time, Judge Shoobridge was a 4th-8th grade school teacher and he has been active in local community and volunteer organizations.

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

Attorneys (n=77, 34% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 86% 7% 7%
Fair and Impartial 84% 5% 11%
Knowledgeable of Law 87% 7% 6%
Communication is Clear 87% 7% 6%
Appropriate Demeanor 87% 5% 8%
Properly Controls Proceedings 95% 3% 3%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=52, 79% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 89% 11% 0%
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 84% 16% 0%
Jurors (n=14, 26% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 93% 7% 0%
Fair and Impartial 95% 0% 5%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 98% 2% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 98% 0% 2%
Properly Controls Proceedings 93% 0% 7%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 87% 3% 10%
Fair and Impartial 75% 15% 10%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 80% 10% 10%
Appropriate Demeanor 90% 7% 3%
Properly Controls Proceedings 87% 10% 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