2026 retention · District Court · 21st Judicial District
88 percentile · rank 8 of 65
composite 0100
86 percentile · rank 15 of 108
composite 0100
21 30th percentile among peers · 35th percentile statewide
1054
Composite index 84.62 among peers (82.41 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.
3.50 of 4 · 83.85 percentile
2.103.80
3.55 of 4 · 85.38 percentile
2.073.82
100.00% 84.62 percentile
25.00%100.00%
Attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 100.00%
Non-attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 100.00%
| Category | Score | Peer median | Peer range (dot is this judge, line is the median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case Management | 3.50median 3.20 | 3.20 | |
| Application and Knowledge of Law | 3.50median 3.10 | 3.10 | |
| Communications | 3.60median 3.30 | 3.30 | |
| Diligence | 3.40median 3.10 | 3.10 | |
| Demeanor | 3.70median 3.30 | 3.30 | |
| Fairness | 3.60median 3.10 | 3.10 |
| Year | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade | 3.50 | 3.60 | 3.40 | 3.50 | 3.60 | 3.50 | 3.50 |
| Responses | 82 | 32 | 34 | 45 | 28 | 18 | 23 |
Commission: meets standards (8–0)
The Twenty-First Judicial District Judicial Performance Commission unanimously by a vote of 8-0 finds that Judge Craig Peter Henderson MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. The Commission has one vacancy and one absent commissioner.
By all accounts Judge Henderson has made a smooth transition from being a county court judge to a district court judge. Judge Henderson demonstrates high levels of integrity and good communications skills. Judge Henderson cares about the people in his courtroom as people, not just cases he needs to get through. He takes the time to ensure parties understand what is happening in the courtroom. In criminal cases, he speaks to the defendants to ensure they understand the seriousness of their misconduct while also encouraging them to do better. Judge Henderson has worked throughout his career to improve his judicial temperament and now receives high marks in this area. Judge Henderson has improved his case handling to ensure cases are completed in a timely fashion but has received mixed reviews on issuing timely orders and managing his courtroom schedule. Judge Henderson has recognized his need to continue improving his docketing and calendar management. Judge Henderson has generally been complimented for his legal knowledge but has expressed his own desire for more training in domestic relations, dependency and neglect, and some civil matters and is looking to work such training into his schedule. Overall, the Commission believes that Judge Henderson meets performance standards and is a credit to the bench.
In reaching these conclusions, the Commission considered several sources of information. The Commission considered survey results, case management information, and Judge Henderson’s self-evaluation. The Commission also interviewed attorneys and the Judge, observed Judge Henderson in court, and read opinions he authored. The survey results and interviews were largely consistent with Judge Henderson’s self-evaluation. While there were only 20 survey respondents, they unanimously agreed that Judge Henderson was meeting performance standards.
Judge Craig P. Henderson grew up on the eastern plains of Colorado. He graduated from McPherson College and received his law degree from Washburn University, both in Kansas. In his career as a lawyer, Judge Henderson was mostly a prosecutor but also did a small amount of private practice. He made Mesa County his home in 2002 and worked for the Mesa County District Attorney’s Office as a prosecutor. He was appointed as a Mesa County Court Judge by Governor Bill Owens in 2006 and as a District Court Judge by Governor Jared Polis in 2024.
2020 retention · County Court · Mesa County
64 percentile · rank 13 of 37
composite 0100
64 percentile · rank 36 of 100
composite 0100
31 55th percentile among peers · 44th percentile statewide
380
Composite index 57.21 among peers (58.83 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.
3.60 of 4 · 64.86 percentile
1.504.00
3.65 of 4 · 68.92 percentile
1.503.95
81.00% 37.84 percentile
0.00%100.00%
Attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 81.00%
Non-attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 100.00%
| Category | Score | Peer median | Peer range (dot is this judge, line is the median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case Management | 3.70median 3.50 | 3.50 | |
| Application and Knowledge of Law | 3.50median 3.30 | 3.30 | |
| Communications | 3.70median 3.60 | 3.60 | |
| Diligence | 3.60median 3.40 | 3.40 | |
| Demeanor | 3.40median 3.50 | 3.50 | |
| Fairness | 4.00median 3.90 | 3.90 |
Commission: meets standards (10–0)
The Twenty-First Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously determined (10-0) Judge Craig Peter Henderson MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
Judge Henderson’s overall combined performance score was 3.6 out of 4. In the categories of Judicial Performance, Judge Henderson scored equal to or better than the overall average of all County Court judges in the state in Case Management, Application and Knowledge of Law, Communications, Diligence, Demeanor and Fairness. As required by statute, the Commission considered the following criteria: Integrity: The Public Defender’s office singled Judge Henderson out for praise in this area. They commended his treatment of those appearing before him and find him to be compassionate in the way he treats criminal defendants. Legal Knowledge: Comments in the surveys indicated Henderson is very knowledgeable about the law. Communication Skills: Comments from the survey indicated that his orders from the bench are clear, concise and thorough, and in pro se cases Henderson is admirable in explaining the law and the legal process. Judicial Temperament: The Commission discussed past concerns about Henderson’s demeanor in court. Henderson acknowledged he is intense in his work and has high expectations. While he does not apologize for his high expectations, he has worked diligently to improve in this area and to communicate his expectations better and in a manner that is helpful and not belittling. Henderson acknowledges that patience will likely be an issue for him through his career on the bench, and he is committed to working on it. The Commission concluded this issue has been satisfactorily addressed and it will continue to be an area that Judge Henderson will prioritize. Administrative Performance: The Commission found this area to be adequate. Service to the legal profession and the public: During his time on the bench, Henderson was involved with Evidence Based Decision Making and the Access to Justice Committee, as well as other local non-profits. However, because of the age of his children, he has cut back on community involvement in the last few years in order to be more engaged with his children.
The Commission reviewed judicial performance data and comments from attorneys and non-attorneys, interviewed Judge Henderson, reviewed his self-evaluation, and met with representatives of the District Attorney’s Office and the Office of the Public Defender. The Commission was unable to observe Judge Henderson in court due to restrictions order by the Colorado Supreme Court and the Twenty-Frist Judicial District suspending normal court operations in light of public health risk posed by COVID-19.
Judge Henderson has served as a Mesa County Court judge since his appointment in January 2006 and presides over civil, criminal, misdemeanor, traffic and small claims. Before his judicial appointment Judge Henderson was a Deputy District Attorney. Based on the full review the Commission agrees unanimously that Judge Craig P. Henderson meets performance standards.
2016 retention · County Court · Mesa County
40 percentile · rank 22 of 36
composite 0100
40 percentile · rank 65 of 108
composite 0100
119 87th percentile among peers · 88th percentile statewide
5140
Composite index 35.19 among peers (37.96 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.
3.44 of 4 · 29.17 percentile
3.113.84
3.46 of 4 · 43.06 percentile
3.023.84
72.00% 33.33 percentile
50.00%100.00%
Attorneys
- Overall grade
- 3.23
- Say “meets standards”
- 72.00%
Non-attorneys
- Overall grade
- 3.65
- Say “meets standards”
- 89.00%
| Category | Score | Peer median | Peer range (dot is this judge, line is the median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case Management | 3.46median 3.50 | 3.50 | |
| Application and Knowledge of Law | 3.33median 3.49 | 3.49 | |
| Communications | 3.56median 3.65 | 3.65 | |
| Diligence | 3.48median 3.50 | 3.50 | |
| Demeanor | 3.28median 3.62 | 3.62 | |
| Fairness | 3.64median 3.66 | 3.66 |
Commission: meets standards (10–0)
The Twenty-First Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance recommends by a vote of 10-0 that Judge Craig P. Henderson BE RETAINED.
Judge Henderson is from Wiley, Colorado. He graduated from McPherson College and Washburn University Law School. Judge Henderson clerked for the Governor of Kansas during law school, worked in private practice, and worked in the Office of the District Attorney for the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Twenty-First Judicial Districts. Judge Henderson was appointed as a Mesa County Court Judge by Governor Owens in 2006.
Judge Henderson was evaluated by the following methods: attorney surveys, non-attorney surveys, self-evaluation, courtroom observations by commission members, review of written decisions, and an interview with the Commission. Of all attorneys completing surveys, 72% recommended to retain, 20% not to retain and 9% made no recommendation. Of all non-attorneys completing surveys, 89% recommended to retain, 6% not to retain, and 5% made no recommendation. 88% of the survey respondents felt that Judge Henderson made appropriate sentencing decisions, compared to 63% appropriate sentencing rate for other County Judges statewide.
The Commission was impressed with Judge Henderson’s efforts to improve the justice system. Over the past 5 years Judge Henderson has participated in and co-chaired a working group addressing evidence-based decision making and innovative new bond guidelines for defendants based on risk levels related to public safety and their flight risk. The outcomes have resulted in a more efficient use of jail space while better maintaining public safety. These reform efforts have received State and National recognition, including a 2015 Criminal Justice Innovations Award from the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys. Judge Henderson has also been very proactive in evaluating the efficiency of his courtroom and making improvements without diminishing his attention to each case individually. A concern mentioned in the attorney surveys was the Judge’s demeanor. The Judge is aware of the concern and is addressing it. Overall, the surveys rated Judge Henderson as a good judge.