Should These Colorado Jurists Be Retained? You Be the Judge!

Coloradans have lots to consider on their 2024 November election ballots, and one of the most stressful sections involves the judicial retention questions.

Because who knows enough about the judges to make qualified decisions about them?

That would be the Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation, which trains and oversees commissions convened in every judicial district to evaluate judge performance.

Since 1996, Colorado has voted on judge retention rather than judge appointments. The Colorado League of Women Voters spearheaded an effort that year to place a citizens’ initiative on the ballot that would change the system for appointing judges from partisan elections to merit selection. Proponents of voting on retention instead of initial election of judges argued that running campaigns and soliciting campaign contributions meant judges could not be independent. Instead, judges now apply to a judicial nominating commission when there are vacancies. The commission selects finalists and passes those names on to the governor, who finalizes each appointment — except in Denver County Court, where the mayor of Denver makes final appointments.

But democracy for judges wasn’t totally eliminated, which is why the public still gets to weigh in on whether those appointed judges should be retained.

After selection, a judge serves a two-year provisional term before voters have a chance to retain them or not. After that, judges serve fixed terms before they're again put up for a retention vote. Judges in county courts have four-year terms; district court judges have six-year terms; court of appeals judges have eight-year terms; and Colorado Supreme Court justices serve ten-year terms. No judge may serve after the age of 72.

Nearly 120 judges are up for retention across the state this year, including eleven judges on either the state Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals.

If you're like 99.99 percent of the voting population and need to get up to speed quickly for the 2025 election, here are a few tips to gauge judges:

How to Measure Judge Performance in Colorado

The Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation provides information about each judge every election cycle on its website and in the blue books mailed to voters. A judicial review commission considers observations from watching judges at work, surveys of court users on judge performance, reviews of judges’ written opinions, and interviews with judges and other relevant parties to determine whether judges meet performance standards.

The surveys cover how judges perform generally, and whether they're fair and neutral. The general score also factors in case management, communications and demeanor, including whether a judge treats everyone in their courtroom with dignity and fairness. Writing standards cover clarity, timeliness of decisions and if a judge's decisions are made reasonably and without regard for possible public criticism.

The Colorado judicial performance results for the 2024 election found that every judge but one met performance standards.

To navigate the website, scroll down to the county where you reside for a list of all the judges you’ll be voting for in the order in which they will appear on your ballot. Green means retention is recommended, and red means it isn’t. To find detailed results on each judge, click on the judge's name, then select the hyperlink on the left side of the screen for "2024 Retention Survey Report."

Colorado Supreme Court and Colorado Court of Appeals judges up for retention appear on all ballots across the state.

Three members of the Colorado Supreme Court are up for retention this year: Monica Márquez, Maria Berkenkotter and Brian Boatright. All were determined to meet performance standards.

In a high-profile case this year in which the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Donald Trump could be excluded from the state's presidential ballot because of his role in the insurrection attempt in Washington, D.C, on January 6, 2021, Berkenkotter and Boatright both dissented, saying they believe Trump should be allowed to participate.

The United States Supreme Court later reversed the Colorado court decision, allowing Trump onto Colorado’s ballot.

There are five members of the Colorado Court of Appeals up for retention: Gilbert Román, Stephanie Dunn, Jerry Jones, Eric Kuhn and Timothy Schutz. All were unanimously determined to meet performance standards.

The same goes for the ten Denver District Court and eight Denver County judges who are up for retention in 2024; all were determined to have met performance standards without a single "no" vote.

Garfield County Court Judge Angela Roff is the only judge of the 116 up for retention across the state to receive an unfavorable review. Based on concerns regarding her legal knowledge and administrative performance, the commission determined that she does not meet performance standards by a 4-3 vote.

“Her interpretation and application of the law at times is inconsistent,” the commission wrote. “With an adequate performance-improvement plan she might advance her legal knowledge and administrative performance enough to meet performance standards. But as of the date of her evaluation, the majority of Commissioners believe that her need for improvement remains.”

In response, Roff says she has improved her case-closure and appeal rate and has “supportive judicial mentors” who are helping her improve. She asks voters to observe her in person if they have concerns.

Amendment H Would Make More Judge Ethics Complaints Public

Voters in Colorado will also have the chance to determine how the state handles ethics complaints against judges. State legislators referred Amendment H to the ballot with bipartisan support this year after a legislative committee specially examined Colorado's judicial discipline system in response to news reports of judicial misconduct coverups.

Amendment H would create a new board to hear ethics complaints against judges and make those complaints public once formal charges are filed. Currently, complaints are only made public if the state Commission on Judicial Discipline formally recommends sanctions against a judge.

That commission will still screen complaints for validity under Amendment H, but rather than either holding an informal hearing itself or calling for a formal hearing by a panel of judges appointed by the Colorado Supreme Court, all formal hearings would be passed on to a new, Independent Judicial Adjudicative Board. The board will comprise four district court judges appointed by the Supreme Court, four attorneys and four citizens appointed by the governor.


There are no formal committees supporting or opposing the measure, though the Judicial Integrity Project says it does not go far enough to increase transparency because the Commission on Judicial Discipline could still dismiss complaints as unfounded without those complaints being made public.

Because it is an amendment to the state constitution, Amendment H will require 55 percent of the vote to pass.