Final Recommendation

Matthew Edward Chandler
The Honorable

Matthew Edward Chandler

District Court Judge
9th Judicial District --
Curry and Roosevelt Counties
General Jurisdiction Court

Year: 2020

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results:

Evaluation: Judge Matthew Chandler’s overall survey results were quite positive. Judge Chandler received high ratings from attorneys for being attentive during proceedings, being courteous to all participants, ruling on motions or cases in a timely manner, maintaining proper control over the proceedings, and ensuring personal staff is professional, productive and knowledgeable of court policies and procedures. Additionally resource staff (e.g., law enforcement, probation and parole officers, interpreters, etc.) rated Judge Chandler highly on all attributes. Court staff rated him highly for behaving in a manner that encourages respect for the courts.

Experience & Education: Judge Matthew Chandler graduated from Eastern New Mexico University and received his law degree from the University of Tulsa in 2001. He was appointed as a District Court Judge in 2015 and was subsequently elected in 2016. He hears primarily criminal law cases. Prior to becoming a District Court judge, Judge Chandler served as the 9th Judicial District Attorney and Assistant District Attorney from 2002-2014. Judge Chandler is Chair of the NM Rules of Criminal Procedure Committee and a member of the 9th District Criminal Justice Coordinating Council.

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

Attorneys (n=25, 53% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 84% 16% 0%
Fair and Impartial 84% 8% 8%
Knowledgeable of Law 92% 8% 0%
Communication is Clear 94% 2% 4%
Appropriate Demeanor 91% 7% 3%
Properly Controls Proceedings 96% 4% 0%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=34, 81% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 93% 7% 0%
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 81% 11% 7%
Jurors (n=45, 24% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 100% 0% 0%
Fair and Impartial 98% 2% 0%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 98% 2% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 98% 2% 0%
Properly Controls Proceedings 100% 0% 0%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Resource Staff (n=37, 31% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 97% 3% 0%
Fair and Impartial 100% 0% 0%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 97% 3% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 100% 0% 0%
Properly Controls Proceedings 100% 0% 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. ‡

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