Final Recommendation

James T. Martin
The Honorable

James T. Martin

District Court Judge
3rd Judicial District --
Doña Ana County
Civil Court

Year: 2020

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results:

Evaluation: Judge James Martin received generally positive ratings. For example, attorneys rated the judge highly for being punctual in commencing proceedings, being attentive to proceedings, maintaining proper control over the proceedings, and for his ability to decisively rule on procedural and substantive matters. The resource staff (e.g., law enforcement, probation and parole officers, interpreters, etc.) also gave Judge Martin positive ratings on all attributes. The court staff gave Judge Martin lower scores compared to his previous evaluations. This decline in scores seems to correlate to Judge Martin’s appointment as Chief Judge. Judge Martin attributes his decline in scores among the court staff to his decisions as Chief Judge, with which the court staff may have disagreed.

Experience & Education: Judge James Martin was appointed to the bench in 2005 and was elected to the bench in 2006. Judge Martin is experienced in civil, domestic relations, and criminal law. He currently hears civil cases, some probate cases, and a small number of family law cases. Before becoming a District Court Judge, Judge Martin worked as an Assistant United States Attorney from 1991 to 2005. Judge Martin received his undergraduate degree from New Mexico State University in 1986 and his law degree from the UNM School of Law in 1991.

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

Attorneys (n=123, 45% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 86% 9% 5%
Fair and Impartial 79% 9% 11%
Knowledgeable of Law 84% 9% 7%
Communication is Clear 88% 5% 7%
Appropriate Demeanor 80% 11% 9%
Properly Controls Proceedings 96% 2% 2%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=49, 67% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 58% 15% 28%
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 40% 30% 30%
Resource Staff (n=48, 11% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 91% 4% 4%
Fair and Impartial 90% 0% 10%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 90% 5% 5%
Appropriate Demeanor 86% 5% 10%
Properly Controls Proceedings 95% 0% 5%
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. ‡

Attorney Retain Recommendation Bar ChartCourt Staff Retain Recommendation Bar ChartResource Staff Retain Recommendation Bar Chart

‡ 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.

 

Privacy Policy

Back to top