Fred Travis Van Soelen
District Court Judge
9th Judicial District
Curry and Roosevelt Counties
Year: 2020
Evaluation: Judge Fred Van Soelen’s survey results were somewhat mixed. Among attorneys, he received positive ratings for being attentive to the proceedings, maintaining proper control over the proceedings, conducting himself in a manner free from impropriety, and for ensuring his personal staff is professional, productive and knowledgeable. His ratings were somewhat lower in finding facts and interpreting the law without regard to possible public criticism, being knowledgeable regarding substantive law and the rules of procedure and evidence, and exercising sound legal reasoning. It was noted by the Commission that his scores improved on every attribute since his previous interim evaluation in 2017. The court staff rated Judge Van Soelen quite positively in all areas. His highest rating was for behaving in a manner that encourages respect for the courts. The resource staff (e.g., law enforcement, probation and parole officers, interpreters, etc.) gave him generally positive scores in all areas. During the interview, Judge Van Soelen acknowledged that he needs to continue his work to improve his performance in certain areas, some of which are noted above.
Experience & Education: Judge Fred Van Soelen was appointed as a District Court Judge in 2013 and elected in 2014. Prior to Judge Van Soelen’s appointment, he worked as a prosecutor from 1999 to 2009 and had a private practice from 2009 to 2013. Judge Van Soelen graduated from McMurry University and received his law degree from St. Mary’s University School of Law. Judge Van Soelen’s community involvement consists of Clovis City Commission, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, Curry County DWI Task Force, Juvenile Community Corrections Advisory Boards, and Curry-Roosevelt County Bar Association.
PERCENTAGE THAT AGREE OR DISAGREE THAT THE JUDGE EXHIBITS POSITIVE QUALITIES IN EACH CATEGORY *
| Attorneys (n=31, 48% Response Rate) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Agree | Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree | Disagree |
| Exhibits Integrity | 74% | 23% | 3% |
| Fair and Impartial | 66% | 15% | 19% |
| Knowledgeable of Law | 58% | 29% | 14% |
| Communication is Clear | 68% | 17% | 15% |
| Appropriate Demeanor | 75% | 6% | 18% |
| Properly Controls Proceedings | 81% | 16% | 3% |
| Court Staff (n=34, 81% Response Rate) | |||
| Category | Agree | Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree | Disagree |
| Communication is Clear | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Properly Controls Proceedings | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Respects Court Employees | 78% | 19% | 4% |
| Jurors (n=38, 19% Response Rate) | |||
| Category | Agree | Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree | Disagree |
| Exhibits Integrity | 100% | 0% | 0% |
| Fair and Impartial | 100% | 0% | 0% |
| Knowledgeable of Law | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Communication is Clear | 99% | 1% | 0% |
| Appropriate Demeanor | 100% | 0% | 0% |
| Respects Court Employees | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Resource Staff (n=37) | |||
| Category | Agree | Partly Agree/ Partly Disagree | Disagree |
| Fair and Impartial | 65% | 21% | 14% |
| Communication is Clear | 76% | 18% | 6% |
| Appropriate Demeanor | 76% | 18% | 6% |
| Properly Controls Proceedings | 79% | 15% | 6% |
| 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. ‡
‡ 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.