The VBA Journal is the official publication of The Virginia Bar Association.
Issue link: http://vba.epubxp.com/i/815343
SPRING 2017 • 25 T his month you may receive an email that asks whether you have appeared before one or more of the judges scheduled for upcoming apprais- als. ese eligibility surveys identify a pool of lawyers for the Judicial Performance Evaluation Program to survey about their firsthand experiences in front of the judges. Only one-third of Virginia attorneys respond to the eligibility surveys, according to Patricia Davis, director of the program. However, the response rate for lawyers who complete evaluations is much stronger, at 62 percent. As an attorney in Virginia courts, stating your eligibility and evaluating the judges you appear before helps ensure that the best judges sit on the bench. "e Judicial Performance Evaluation Program serves two purposes: to provide a self-improvement resource for judges and to provide information for use by the General Assembly in the judicial re-election process," said Chief Justice Donald W. Lemons, who oversees the program. "However, neither purpose can be achieved if judges do not receive a sufficient number of evaluations to get an accurate picture of their performance. e success of this program is de- pendent upon attorneys participating in the evaluation process and providing accurate and fair evaluations." First-year and midterm evaluations provide valu- able feedback for judges and can point out areas for improvement. Perhaps most important, the evaluation program ensures that judges receive fair and unbiased consideration when it's time for re-election by the General Assembly. Virginia and South Carolina are the only states in the nation where election and re-election of judges rests in the hands of state legislators. Before the Judicial Performance Evaluation Program started, state legislators had little information about a judge's performance when considering him or her for re-election. "We basically rubber-stamped everything," said Del. Dave Albo, who represents the 42nd District. An early proponent of the evaluations, Albo said the program gives lawyers a chance to voice their dissatisfaction with a judge's performance. e surveys also give attorneys the means to convey when a judge has done something right, whether it's displaying good demeanor in court or explaining the basis for his or her decision using excellent communication skills. Drawing from a large and appropriate pool of lawyers with experience litigating before a judge in court is crucial to ensuring that the process works right. "Without a really good turnout from the bar on these evaluations, you may only hear from the ones who've had a bad experience with a judge," Albo added. HISTORY AND PROCESS e program began in 2006 after a pilot program tested the process. Budget constraints in 2009 halted evaluations. ey resumed in 2014 when the General Assembly reallocated funding. e chief justice over- sees the program with assistance from an advisory committee Lemons created in 2015 to recommend any improvements. Davis handles the day-to-day operation of the program and coordinates with all the different players. ey include Virginia Commonwealth University's Survey and Evaluation Research Laboratory (VCU- SERL), which distributes the surveys and compiles the reports. VCU-SERL emails the eligibility survey to all active members of the Virginia State Bar twice each year — in May and November. e eligibility survey asks attorneys to identify which listed judges due for evaluation they have observed or appeared before during a specific pe- riod — three years for circuit judges and one year for district judges. Additionally, lawyers may be presumed eligible to evaluate a judge based on case information from courts and attorney staff listings from commonwealth's attorney and public defender offices. However, information from court case systems may not be as accurate as the information from the eligibility surveys. e attorney identified in case information might not be the lawyer who appeared before the named judge, Davis said. Attorneys identified from all sources make up a unique pool of potential evaluators for each judge, with the goal to survey 250 attorneys for each. When more attorneys are identified for a judge, VCU-SERL selects a pool of 250 randomly. In rural areas, it's often impossible to find 250 attorneys who practice before a specific judge, so it's doubly important that every eligible attorney partic- ipates. at way, judges receive evaluations from the largest pool of attorneys possible. FREQUENCY AND HANDLING OF EVALUATIONS Circuit and district judges are evaluated at least twice in each term, once around the middle of their