Final Recommendation

Steven Edward Blankinship
The Honorable

Steven Edward Blankinship

District Court Judge
12th Judicial District --
Lincoln and Otero Counties
General Jurisdiction Court

Year: 2020

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results:

Evaluation: Judge Steven Blankinship’s overall survey results were quite positive. Attorneys rated him highly for demonstrating appropriate demeanor on the bench, being courteous to all participants, and maintaining proper control over the proceedings. The resource staff (e.g., law enforcement, probation and parole officers, interpreters, etc.) rated him positively on all attributes and the court staff gave him very high ratings. In fact, the court staff gave him a perfect mean score of 5.0 (on the 5-point rating scale) when asked whether or not they would recommend retention.

Experience & Education: Judge Steven Blankinship was appointed as a District Court Judge in 2017 and subsequently elected the following year. He graduated in 2001 from Northern Arizona University and in 2004 received his law degree at The University of Akron in Ohio. Judge Blankinship was an Assistant District Attorney for the 3rd and 12th District Attorney’s offices, and an attorney for the Office of Governor Susana Martinez. Judge Blankinship received the Prosecutor of the Year award for the 3rd District Attorney’s Office in 2010-2011. Judge Blankinship taught courses on Tax and Revenue, AODA, and LEO academies; assisted in 12th Judicial District Court Pro Bono services; and is a member of various legal committees.

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

Attorneys (n=53, 34% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 82% 6% 12%
Fair and Impartial 80% 9% 11%
Knowledgeable of Law 81% 13% 6%
Communication is Clear 83% 12% 5%
Appropriate Demeanor 88% 6% 6%
Properly Controls Proceedings 96% 4% 0%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=19, 70% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 100% 0% 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 100% 0% 0%
Jurors (n=41, 28% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 97% 3% 0%
Fair and Impartial 95% 3% 2%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 96% 3% 1%
Appropriate Demeanor 99% 1% 0%
Properly Controls Proceedings 100% 0% 0%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Resource Staff (n=30, 14% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 93% 7% 0%
Fair and Impartial 94% 6% 0%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 100% 0% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 100% 0% 0%
Properly Controls Proceedings 80% 13% 7%
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