The VBA Journal is the official publication of The Virginia Bar Association.
Issue link: http://vba.epubxp.com/i/815343
SPRING 2017 • 27 gotten midterm evaluations with feedback, which should have given them some indication of where they needed to improve." Since then, judges seem to be taking the evaluations more seriously. "I have a feeling that once we got rid of four or five bad judges, people changed their ways," Albo added. "is year — 2017 — we had everybody score in the 80s and 90s and only one in the 60s." But lawmakers re-elected even the judge who scored low, he explained, because that individual came in with a game plan to improve and already had asked an experienced judge to observe and provide tips for improvement. "She had crushing dockets," which was a legitimate problem, Albo said, "and while we weren't impressed with her score, we were impressed that she had a game plan." JUDICIAL DEMEANOR AND SURVEY EVOLUTION Demeanor is one of the most important factors considered on the evaluations, according to Albo, who said he's noticed that when judges score well on demeanor-related questions, they also typically score pretty well on the entire evaluation. Powell said she agrees with Albo, who has publicly stated that having a good demeanor is crucial to being a good judge. "How you treat people is sometimes as important as the ruling that you give, and working with people is a big part of being a judge. at's what we do," she said. "We deal with people in sensitive situations where sometimes the judge with even the best demeanor could be viewed as lacking in demeanor. As judges, we always have to be careful as to how we approach the people and the situation." e rating scale and survey questions in the Judicial Performance Evaluation have evolved over time to avoid biased responses, Davis said. Additionally, few questions ask about judges' knowledge of the law, which she said is subject to interpretation, and more questions probe how judges interact with others. "Most of the questions relate to how well they conduct themselves in the courtroom and what they require of other people in the courtroom," she said. "We certainly appreciate the amount of participation we have received" from the nearly two-thirds of attor- neys completing the evaluation surveys, Davis added, "and hope that it continues." However, the lower response rate to the eligibility surveys so far indicates that the pool of attorneys who evaluate judges could be much larger. Lawyer participation in the evaluation surveys is crucial to make sure that the pool is statistically sound, Powell said. "It's always going to help statistically to have an adequate pool, and if we don't have an adequate pool, we might get questions as to how valid the results are." ■ Lisa Oliver Monroe is a freelance writer living in Richmond. Her writing has been published in Virginia newspapers, regional magazines, and the book Williamsburg: With Jamestown and Yorktown, America's Historic Triangle. The 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. — Chief Justice Donald W. Lemons " "