Final Recommendation

The Honorable

J.C. Robinson

District Court Judge
6th Judicial District --
Grant, Hidalgo, and Luna Counties

Year: 2014

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results: Retained

Evaluation: Judge J.C. Robinson received somewhat mixed scores from the populations surveyed. For example, attorneys and resource staff (e.g., law enforcement, probation and parole officers, interpreters, etc.) rated him positively for promptness in scheduling hearings, attentiveness to the proceedings, and punctuality in commencing proceedings. Attorneys also rated him well for ruling on motions or cases in a timely manner and for his ability to decisively rule on procedural and substantive matters. In addition, the court staff gave positive ratings to Judge Robinson for behaving in a manner that encourages respect for the courts and for ensuring that his personal staff is professional, productive and knowledgeable. However, compared to his other scores, attorneys rated him lower when it comes to treating all participants equally and being courteous to all participants. Since his interim evaluation in 2011, Judge Robinson has worked on making improvements in these areas and, in fact, has improved in 20 of 21 categories among attorneys.

Experience & Education: Judge Robinson was elected as a District Court judge in 2004. Prior to being elected, he was in private practice and served as a district attorney for the Sixth Judicial District. Judge Robinson is a present member of the New Mexico Trial Lawyers (honorary) and the New Mexico District Court Judges Association. He received his undergraduate degree from the University of Arizona and his law degree from Arizona State University in 1973.

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

Attorneys (n=57, 56% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 62% 8% 30%
Fair and Impartial 52% 16% 32%
Knowledgeable of Law 71% 21% 8%
Communication is Clear 69% 20% 11%
Appropriate Demeanor 49% 15% 36%
Properly Controls Proceedings 81% 11% 7%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=19, 63% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 83% 8% 8%
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 58% 25% 17%
Jurors (n=31, 36% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 97% 3% 0%
Fair and Impartial 96% 2% 2%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 99% 1% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 95% 3% 2%
Properly Controls Proceedings 100% 0% 0%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 89% 5% 5%
Fair and Impartial 78% 7% 15%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 84% 8% 8%
Appropriate Demeanor 84% 5% 11%
Properly Controls Proceedings 97% 3% 0%
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