Final Recommendation

The Honorable

Linda S. Rogers

Metropolitan Court Judge
Bernalillo County

Year: 2018

Recommendation: Do Not Retain

Election Results: Retained

Evaluation: The attorneys gave Judge Linda Rogers somewhat mixed scores. Judge Rogers rated positively with attorneys for being attentive to the proceedings, maintaining proper control over the proceedings, displaying familiarity with court cases through prior preparation, and for ensuring that her personal staff is professional, productive and knowledgeable. Court staff rated Judge Rogers positively on all attributes. Attorneys and resource staff rated Judge Rogers somewhat lower for not always displaying fairness and impartiality toward each side of the case and for not always being courteous to all participants. In addition, attorneys gave her a low rating for not always demonstrating appropriate demeanor on the bench. Resource staff scores are among the lowest for Metropolitan Court Judges. These deficiencies were discussed during prior evaluations and her scores still remain lower than those for other Metropolitan Court Judges.

Experience & Education: Judge Linda Rogers was appointed and elected as a Metropolitan Court Judge in 2006. Prior to this, she was a staff attorney with the Pueblo County Legal Services in Colorado for two years. She was also an assistant public defender for nine years and an assistant district attorney for four and a half years in Albuquerque. Judge Rogers received her undergraduate degree from New Mexico State University and, in 1990, her law degree from the University of Colorado.

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

Attorneys (n=66, 44% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 63% 22% 15%
Fair and Impartial 68% 17% 15%
Knowledgeable of Law 73% 14% 14%
Communication is Clear 75% 13% 13%
Appropriate Demeanor 54% 24% 22%
Properly Controls Proceedings 82% 12% 6%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=47, 26% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 72% 20% 9%
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 70% 19% 11%
Jurors (n=8, 8% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 100% 0% 0%
Fair and Impartial 100% 0% 0%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 100% 0% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 100% 0% 0%
Properly Controls Proceedings 100% 0% 0%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Resource Staff (n=66)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 48% 18% 34%
Fair and Impartial 51% 16% 32%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 60% 14% 26%
Appropriate Demeanor 45% 23% 32%
Properly Controls Proceedings 64% 19% 17%
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