Final Recommendation

The Honorable

Jonathan B. Sutin

Court of Appeals Judge
Statewide

Year: 2016

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results: Retained

Evaluation: The results of Judge Jonathan Sutin’s evaluation were quite positive. His fellow appellate judges rated him positively on all attributes. Judge Sutin’s scores among attorneys were positive for demonstrating appropriate demeanor, rendering opinions without regard to possible public criticism, and for conducting himself in a manner free from impropriety. Among attorneys, Judge Sutin also received a positive score for writing opinions that demonstrate scholarly legal analysis. Court staff rated Judge Sutin highly for being a hard worker and for respecting court employees regardless of position. The Commission encourages Judge Sutin to continue his outstanding work on the Court of Appeals.

Experience & Education: Judge Sutin has served on the Court of Appeals since February 1999. Prior to his service as a judge, he worked with the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, and for 35 years in private practice as a trial and appellate lawyer. Judge Sutin serves as Chair of the Supreme Court’s Judicial Education Committee. He also teaches a class on Appellate Decision Making at the University of New Mexico School of Law. He received his undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado and 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=62, 30% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 86% 9% 5%
Fair and Impartial 76% 12% 12%
Knowledgeable of Law 72% 16% 12%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Appropriate Demeanor 84% 13% 4%
Timeliness of Rulings 70% 20% 10%
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 95% 2% 2%
Fair and Impartial N/A N/A N/A
Knowledgeable of Law 89% 9% 2%
Respects Court Employees 92% 8% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor N/A N/A N/A
Timeliness of Rulings 94% 6% 0%
Handles Ongoing Workload 100% 0% 0%
Appellate Judges (n=13, 100% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 100% 0% 0%
Fair and Impartial 100% 0% 0%
Knowledgeable of Law 92% 8% 0%
Respects Court Employees 100% 0% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 100% 0% 0%
Timeliness of Rulings 100% 0% 0%
Handles Ongoing Workload 100% 0% 0%
District Judges (n=60, 64% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 96% 4% 0%
Fair and Impartial N/A N/A N/A
Knowledgeable of Law 91% 6% 3%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Appropriate Demeanor N/A N/A N/A
Timeliness of Rulings 79% 17% 4%
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