ILNews

IndyBar releases results of judicial candidate peer evaluation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Association’s Judicial Excellence Political Action Committee released the results of its 2012 judicial candidate evaluation. The Democratic and Republican Party ballots will feature twelve candidates vying for 10 spots on Marion Superior Court. The candidates received varied approval rates, from just 18 percent to nearly 97 percent.

Republican Superior Judge Robert R. Altice Jr. received a 96.7 percent recommendation rate; Judges Mark D. Stoner and Heather A. Welch, both Democrats, and Republican Judge Michael D. Keele all received 95 percent approval ratings.

Coming in with the lowest approval rates are Democratic candidate Greg Bowes, with 52.7 percent; Democratic Judge Becky Pierson-Treacy at 30.7 percent; and Republican candidate Paul K. Ogden at just over 18 percent.

The survey was sent to IBA members, attorneys in the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office and Marion County Public Defender’s Office, as well as any other attorney who had entered an appearance in Marion County courts in the last three years. Respondents were asked to verify they had professional contact with the judicial candidates and if they did, they were to asked to rate their experience with those candidates based on five criteria.

The criteria are: demonstration of sufficient legal experience to be an effective judge; efficiency as an office administrator; conduct appropriate for a judge; knowledge of rules of evidence, procedure and substantive law; and ability to be unbiased, independent and impartial.

Complete details are posted at www.indyjudges.org.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Other than a complete lack of any verifiable and valid historical citations to back your wild context-free accusations, you also forget to allege "ate Native American children, ate slave children, ate their own children, and often did it all while using salad forks rather than dinner forks." (gasp)

  2. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  3. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  4. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  5. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

ADVERTISEMENT