Brett Martin
District Court · 17th Judicial District · retention evaluations: 2024
2024 retention · District Court · 17th Judicial District
41 percentile · rank 31 of 52
composite 0100
33 percentile · rank 72 of 107
composite 0100
39 53rd percentile among peers · 60th percentile statewide
14112
Composite index 42.95 among peers (39.41 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.
3.10 of 4 · 35.58 percentile
2.303.80
3.05 of 4 · 27.88 percentile
2.273.80
90.00% 65.38 percentile
29.00%100.00%
Attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 90.00%
Non-attorneys
- Say “meets standards”
- 53.00%
| Category | Score | Peer median | Peer range (dot is this judge, line is the median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case Management | 3.20median 3.30 | 3.30 | |
| Application and Knowledge of Law | 2.80median 3.10 | 3.10 | |
| Communications | 3.10median 3.30 | 3.30 | |
| Diligence | 3.20median 3.20 | 3.20 | |
| Demeanor | 3.10median 3.20 | 3.20 | |
| Fairness | 2.90median 3.10 | 3.10 |
Commission: meets standards (10–0)
The Seventeenth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously agrees by a vote of 10-0 that Judge Brett Martin MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
Survey data on Judge Martin gave him high marks for the consistency of his rulings, and his ability to identify and analyze relevant facts. Likely because of this, Judge Martin also had good ratings on the issue of whether he based his decisions on evidence and arguments. Judge Martin is found to have a professional demeanor while presiding over matters in his courtroom. In surveys from non-attorneys, respondents expressed that his scores were lower than other qualities of Judge Martin when asked their perception of his willingness to give participants an opportunity to be heard, although these respondents did acknowledge that he was fair and impartial to both sides. Judge Martin recognizes that, particularly with a criminal docket, he needs to be more cognizant of the need to be patient and take steps to ensure parties are heard. Judge Martin was given the highest rating available from appellate judges familiar with his work as a trial judge. He has been actively involved in legal education programs, primarily in trial advocacy training of other lawyers.
The Commission conducted and reviewed a personal interview with Judge Martin, reviewed opinions he authored, observed him in court, and reviewed the limited number judicial performance survey responses from attorneys and non-attorneys who had interaction in Judge Martin 's court and who had responded to surveys. Among the survey questions was "Based on your responses to the previous questions related to this performance evaluation criteria, do you think Judge Martin meets judicial performance standards?" Of the responding nineteen attorneys, 90% answered “Yes” and 10% answered “No.” Of the fifteen non-attorneys responding to this survey, 53% answered “Yes” and 33% answered “No,” while 13% expressed no opinion.
Judge Martin currently presides over criminal matters in the district court in Brighton, Colorado, with 100% of the cases being criminal matters after having presided over a civil docket in the year preceding. He was appointed by Governor Polis in January of 2021. He graduated from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law in 2010 and began his legal career as a Deputy District Attorney at the 17th Judicial District Attorney’s Office. He was promoted to Chief Trial Deputy in 2016 and supervised the County Court, Child Victim, and Juvenile Units of the District Attorney’s Office before his appointment in 2021.