Final Recommendation

Michael E. Vigil
The Honorable

Michael E. Vigil

Supreme Court Justice
Statewide

Year: 2022

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results:

Evaluation: Senior Justice Michael Vigil's survey results were generally positive. For example, attorneys rated him positively for conducting himself in a manner free from impropriety and for demonstrating appropriate demeanor during proceedings. Court staff rated him positively for behaving in a manner that encourages respect for the courts and for being a hard worker. The district judges rated him positively for knowledge of the law and for writing separate opinions that are appropriate in tone and substance. His fellow appellate judges and justices rate him mostly positive, with the exception of timeliness in making rulings and rendering decisions, which was somewhat lower.

Experience & Education: Justice Michael Vigil is a former Chief Justice of the New Mexico Supreme Court and former Chief Judge of the New Mexico Court of Appeals. He received his undergraduate degree from the College of Santa Fe and his law degree from Georgetown University Law Center. Justice Vigil was in private practice for 24 years prior to his appointment to the New Mexico Court of Appeals in 2003, where he served until 2018 when he was elected to the Supreme Court. Justice Vigil is a member of numerous professional and community organizations.

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

Attorneys (n=121, 32% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 84% 8% 8%
Fair and Impartial 75% 16% 9%
Knowledgeable of Law 78% 12% 10%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Appropriate Demeanor 88% 9% 4%
Timeliness of Rulings 76% 16% 8%
Handles Ongoing Workload N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=13, 13% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 69% 31% 0%
Fair and Impartial N/A N/A N/A
Knowledgeable of Law 70% 19% 11%
Respects Court Employees 58% 25% 17%
Appropriate Demeanor N/A N/A N/A
Timeliness of Rulings 55% 27% 18%
Handles Ongoing Workload 50% 30% 20%
Appellate Judges (n=12, 86% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 92% 0% 8%
Fair and Impartial 92% 8% 0%
Knowledgeable of Law 86% 6% 8%
Respects Court Employees 100% 0% 0%
Appropriate Demeanor 100% 0% 0%
Timeliness of Rulings 63% 13% 25%
Handles Ongoing Workload 75% 13% 13%
District Judges (n=39, 42% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 82% 8% 10%
Fair and Impartial N/A N/A N/A
Knowledgeable of Law 77% 16% 7%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Appropriate Demeanor N/A N/A N/A
Timeliness of Rulings 72% 19% 8%
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. ‡

Attorney Retain Recommendation Bar ChartCourt Staff Retain Recommendation Bar ChartAppellate Judges Retain Recommendation Bar ChartTrial Court Retain Recommendation Percentage 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