Final Recommendation

The Honorable

Tim L. Garcia

Court of Appeals Judge
Statewide

Year: 2016

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results: Retained

Evaluation: Judge Tim Garcia received generally positive ratings. For example, attorneys rated Judge Garcia positively for demonstrating appropriate demeanor during proceedings, for conducting himself in a manner free from impropriety, and for rendering opinions without regard to possible public criticism. Court staff rated him positively for writing separate opinions that are appropriate in tone and substance, and for rendering opinions without regard to possible public criticism. His fellow appellate judges rated him positively for his knowledge regarding substantive law and the rules of procedure and evidence, arriving at proceedings on time, assisting in administrative duties, and participating in court projects. However, some attorneys feel Judge Garcia does not always exercise sound legal reasoning; the court staff, including attorney and non-attorney staff, rated him somewhat lower when it comes to ensuring that his personal staff is professional, productive, and knowledgeable about court policies and procedures.

Experience & Education: Judge Garcia was appointed to the Court of Appeals on November 12, 2008 and was elected to that position in 2010. Previously, he was elected to serve as a District Judge in November 2002. In that capacity, he presided over the civil and criminal docket, and was one of the drug court judges for the First Judicial District. Judge Garcia received his undergraduate degree in business administration from the University of New Mexico, and received his law degree from the University of New Mexico School of Law.

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

Attorneys (n=64, 28% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 82% 15% 4%
Fair and Impartial 72% 20% 8%
Knowledgeable of Law 67% 24% 9%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Appropriate Demeanor 87% 9% 4%
Timeliness of Rulings 69% 28% 4%
Handles Ongoing Workload N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=48, 52% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 79% 16% 5%
Fair and Impartial N/A N/A N/A
Knowledgeable of Law 88% 12% 0%
Respects Court Employees 82% 12% 6%
Appropriate Demeanor N/A N/A N/A
Timeliness of Rulings 71% 29% 0%
Handles Ongoing Workload 87% 13% 0%
Appellate Judges (n=13, 100% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 92% 0% 8%
Fair and Impartial 92% 0% 8%
Knowledgeable of Law 87% 9% 4%
Respects Court Employees 91% 0% 9%
Appropriate Demeanor 82% 9% 9%
Timeliness of Rulings 91% 9% 0%
Handles Ongoing Workload 73% 27% 0%
District Judges (n=60, 64% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 96% 2% 2%
Fair and Impartial N/A N/A N/A
Knowledgeable of Law 89% 6% 5%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Appropriate Demeanor N/A N/A N/A
Timeliness of Rulings 74% 20% 7%
Handles Ongoing Workload 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