2026 retention · District Court · 12th Judicial District
5 percentile · rank 62 of 65
composite 0100
5 percentile · rank 103 of 108
composite 0100
11 3rd percentile among peers · 3rd percentile statewide
1054
Composite index 7.69 among peers (8.33 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.
2.60 of 4 · 9.23 percentile
2.103.80
2.57 of 4 · 6.92 percentile
2.073.82
60.00% 6.92 percentile
25.00%100.00%
Attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 60.00%
Non-attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 67.00%
| Category | Score | Peer median | Peer range (dot is this judge, line is the median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case Management | 2.50median 3.20 | 3.20 | |
| Application and Knowledge of Law | 2.50median 3.10 | 3.10 | |
| Communications | 2.80median 3.30 | 3.30 | |
| Diligence | 2.30median 3.10 | 3.10 | |
| Demeanor | 2.60median 3.30 | 3.30 | |
| Fairness | 2.70median 3.10 | 3.10 |
| Year | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade | 3.60 | 3.70 | 3.80 | 3.70 | 3.50 | 3.30 |
| Responses | 20 | 25 | 34 | 23 | 27 | 23 |
Commission: meets standards (6–0)
The Twelfth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously (6-0), with two commission vacancies and two commissioners absent, finds that Judge Amanda C. Hopkins MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. The commission evaluated Judge Hopkins based on several criteria, including integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, administrative performance, and service to the legal profession and the public.
Judge Hopkins presides over civil, domestic relations, juvenile, criminal, and water matters throughout the San Luis Valley. Judge Hopkins is a fair and impartial decision maker who “treats all matters, litigants, and parties with equal respect.” Attorneys and non-attorneys alike highlight Judge Hopkins's effective communication and active listening skills, noting her commitment to ensuring that all participants understand the proceedings and feel that their voices have been fairly heard. Judge Hopkins diligently prepares for her docket, stays up-to-date on case law and statutory changes, and issues thorough findings and orders. Due to her diligent preparation and understanding of the law, appellate judges from the Colorado Court of Appeals scored Judge Hopkins’s overall performance as a 3.6 out of 4. Furthermore, whether focusing on the remediation of generational trauma and educational neglect within her truancy docket or navigating the complexities of high-profile litigation with care, Judge Hopkins demonstrates an unwavering commitment to the community. Her administrative leadership as Chief Judge and her judicial approach reflect a sincere dedication to enhancing the legal outcomes and quality of life for all residents of the Twelfth Judicial District. One area of growth highlighted by attorneys, non-attorneys, and Judge Hopkins herself, is the timeliness of her decision making in civil litigation. Judge Hopkins acknowledged delays in issuing written orders and has sought further training and education to address this issue. Additionally, a few survey responses raised concern regarding Judge Hopkins’s understanding of water law, the rules of civil procedure, and the rules of evidence.
Based on the Commission’s overall evaluation, Judge Hopkins has demonstrated that she meets performance standards in all categories. In reaching this finding, the Commission interviewed Judge Hopkins, conducted numerous courtroom observations, and reviewed judicial performance data, which includes Judge Hopkins’s written orders, feedback from attorneys and non-attorneys, and a self-evaluation done by the Judge herself. Because of the small number of survey responses, the Commission used the survey feedback to address concerns during Judge Hopkins’s interview and check the Commissioner’s independent findings.
Judge Hopkins was appointed to the bench in 2018 and named Chief Judge of the 12th Judicial District in 2023. She graduated from the University of Puget Sound in 2001 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in International Political Economy and received her Juris Doctor from Seattle University in 2006. Prior to joining the bench, Judge Hopkins worked for the Alamosa Office of the State Public Defender and became the managing deputy public defender of the office in 2011. In 2025, Judge Hopkins received the “Restorative Justice Champion” award from the Center for Restorative Programs for her work with families and schools appearing on her truancy docket.
2020 retention · District Court · 12th Judicial District
72 percentile · rank 17 of 59
composite 0100
72 percentile · rank 28 of 100
composite 0100
22 7th percentile among peers · 19th percentile statewide
1488
Composite index 70.06 among peers (68.83 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.
3.60 of 4 · 73.73 percentile
2.203.90
3.62 of 4 · 67.80 percentile
2.423.88
89.00% 68.64 percentile
39.00%100.00%
Attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 89.00%
Non-attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 100.00%
| Category | Score | Peer median | Peer range (dot is this judge, line is the median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case Management | 3.60median 3.60 | 3.60 | |
| Application and Knowledge of Law | 3.50median 3.40 | 3.40 | |
| Communications | 3.60median 3.50 | 3.50 | |
| Diligence | 3.60median 3.40 | 3.40 | |
| Demeanor | 3.70median 3.60 | 3.60 | |
| Fairness | 3.70median 4.00 | 4.00 |
Commission: meets standards (7–0)
The Twelfth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously agrees (7-0) that Judge Amanda C. Hopkins MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
Judge Hopkins presided over several case types this term, including juvenile (35% of her docket), criminal, (35% of her docket), civil (15% of her docket), probate (10% of her docket), and domestic relations (5% of her docket) cases. Based on the Commission’s overall evaluation, Judge Hopkins has demonstrated that she meets or exceeds performance standards in all categories. She received her highest survey scores in the categories of demeanor and fairness. Her survey results were above statewide averages for district judges in all categories. Judge Hopkins was noted to diligently prepare for hearings and trials. Her opinions are clear and easily understood. Based on these findings, the Commission unanimously agreed that Judge Hopkins meets judicial performance standards.
The Commission conducted a personal interview with Judge Hopkins, reviewed opinions she authored, observed her in court, reviewed comments received from interested parties during the evaluation, and reviewed survey responses from appellate judges, attorneys and non-attorneys who had experience with Judge Hopkins. In the final survey question, respondents (other than appellate judges) were asked if they thought Judge Hopkins met judicial performance standards. Of the attorneys responding to the survey, 89% answered, yes, meets performance standards; the remaining 11% had no opinion. Of non- attorneys responding to the survey, 100% answered yes, meets performance standards. A total of twenty-two persons responded to surveys expressing their opinion of Judge Hopkins’s performance.
Judge Hopkins was appointed to the District Court Bench on July 10, 2018. She graduated from the University of Puget Sound in Tacoma, Washington in 2001 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in International Political Economy and minor in Latin American Studies. She earned her J.D. in 2006 from Seattle University. Judge Hopkins moved to the San Luis Valley in 2007 to work for the Office of the State Public Defender, where she was the managing deputy public defender from December 2011 until the Summer of 2018. Judge Hopkins is actively involved in community service in her judicial role. She is a member of the Colorado Supreme Court’s Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, the Colorado Legal and Judicial Education Board, and the Colorado Bar Association’s Executive Council. Judge Hopkins has taken on additional projects outside of the courts including a truancy project with the Center of Restorative Programs; working with the Greater Colorado Task Force through the Colorado Bar Association to recruit young lawyers to rural Colorado; and studying Colorado water law.