Bench Record
66percentile

James H. Garrecht

County Court · Routt County · retention evaluations: 2018

2018 retention · County Court · Routt County

Among 2018 county court judges

66 percentile · rank 24 of 71

composite 0100

Among all 2018 judges statewide

67 percentile · rank 42 of 128

composite 0100

Survey responses

70 54th percentile among peers · 54th percentile statewide

4130

Composite index 65.96 among peers (63.93 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.

Overall survey grade

3.66 of 4 · 77.46 percentile

2.593.90

Mean of category scores

3.60 of 4 · 69.01 percentile

2.593.90

Attorneys saying “meets standards”

85.00% 51.41 percentile

0.00%100.00%

Attorneys

Overall grade
3.39
Say “meets standards”
85.00%

Non-attorneys

Overall grade
3.78
Say “meets standards”
92.00%
Category scores (0–4) against county court peers
CategoryScorePeer medianPeer range (dot is this judge, line is the median)
Case Management3.63median 3.503.50
Application and Knowledge of Law3.52median 3.383.38
Communications3.58median 3.583.58
Diligence3.42median 3.423.42
Demeanor3.68median 3.493.49
Fairness3.80median 3.603.60

Commission: meets standards (9–0)

Recommendation: The Fourteenth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously (9-0) voted that Judge James H. Garrecht MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Background: Judge Garrecht is a graduate of Fort Lewis College in Durango, Colorado, and obtained his Juris Doctorate from William Mitchell Law School in St. Paul, Minnesota in 1979. Judge Garrecht was appointed to the Routt County Court in 1987. Before his appointment, he served as a Deputy District Attorney in the 15th Judicial District in 1979, a Deputy District Attorney for the 14th Judicial District from 1980 to 1982, and was in private practice in Steamboat Springs from 1982 – 1987. In private practice, he focused on criminal and domestic relations law. Judge Garrecht presides over all County Court cases filed in Routt County, including civil, small claims, misdemeanor, felony, traffic offenses and traffic infraction cases. He regularly conducts bench and jury trials.

Evaluation Methodology: Judge Garrecht was evaluated as to Integrity, Legal Knowledge, Communication, Judicial Temperament, Administrative Performance (Management) and Service to the Legal Profession. The Commission reviewed written evaluations from attorneys and non-attorneys, including verbatim comments attached to evaluation questionnaires, as well as other written communications critiquing him. The Commission also considered Judge Garrecht’s self-evaluation and written orders and opinions that he selected and submitted for review. Commission members personally observed Judge Garrecht in his courtroom, and Judge Garrecht sat for an interview before the Commission. Of the attorneys surveyed, 85% found Judge Garrecht to meet performance standards, 5% found that he does not meet those standards, and 10% expressed no opinion. Of non-attorneys surveyed, 92% found he meets performance standards, 4% found that he does not, and 4% expressed no opinion.

Performance: There were no significant areas of deficiency noted from the evaluation of Judge Garrecht that required this Commission’s attention. Judge Garrecht’s performance exceeds the standards of performance by which county judges are evaluated. Judge Garrecht scores very highly in matters of integrity, communication, judicial temperament, administrative skills and community service. His “people skills” and management of his courtroom are exemplary. He received many favorable comments regarding his courtroom demeanor. As to areas of improvement, which were deemed to be minor in nature, the Commission addressed with Judge Garrecht the need to speak more slowly when providing repetitive instructions to defendants in criminal cases. Judge Garrecht self-identifies as a weakness the need to improve his technology skills – although this does not cause the Commission concern or to doubt the accuracy of its findings.

State evaluation page · 2018 survey report (PDF)