Final Recommendation

Jill M. Martinez
The Honorable

Jill M. Martinez

Metropolitan Court Judge
Bernalillo County

Year: 2022

Recommendation: Retain

Election Results:

Evaluation: Judge Jill Martinez received generally positive scores among the attorneys and resource staff (e.g., law enforcement officers). For example, attorneys rated her positively for treating pro se parties fairly, being punctual in commencing proceedings, maintaining proper control over the proceedings, and for ensuring her personal staff is professional, productive, and knowledgeable of court policies and procedures. In fact, her scores among the attorneys improved significantly since her previous evaluation in 2020. However, Judge Jill Martinez' scores among court staff declined from 2020 to 2022. Almost half of the court staff rated her low when it comes to respecting court employees and almost half did not recommend her retention.

Experience & Education: Judge Jill Martinez was elected to the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court in 2014. Her prior work experience includes private practice and service as an assistant district attorney in Bernalillo County. She is a member of the American Bar Association, serves on the DWI Bench Book Committee, and is an instructor on the 4th Amendment for the Judicial Education Committee. Judge Martinez received her undergraduate degree from Troy State University in 1999 and her law degree from the University of Idaho in 2004.

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

Attorneys (n=54, 48% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 69% 15% 15%
Fair and Impartial 69% 13% 17%
Knowledgeable of Law 67% 21% 12%
Communication is Clear 77% 10% 13%
Appropriate Demeanor 69% 17% 13%
Properly Controls Proceedings 87% 6% 8%
Respects Court Employees N/A N/A N/A
Court Staff (n=48, 22% Response Rate)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 47% 17% 36%
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 38% 13% 49%
Resource Staff (n=22)
Category Agree Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree Disagree
Exhibits Integrity 75% 10% 15%
Fair and Impartial 70% 10% 20%
Knowledgeable of Law N/A N/A N/A
Communication is Clear 80% 5% 15%
Appropriate Demeanor 75% 5% 20%
Properly Controls Proceedings 79% 11% 11%
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