Rule 3-101. Judicial performance standards.

Intent

To establish standards of performance for application by the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission.

Applicability

This rule applies to all justices and judges of the courts of record and not of record.

Statement of the Rule

(1) Case under advisement standard. A case is considered to be under advisement when the entire case or any issue in the case has been submitted to the judge for final determination.

(2)(A) A justice of the Supreme Court demonstrates satisfactory performance by circulating not more than an average of three principal opinions per calendar year more than six months after submission with no more than half of the maximum exceptional cases in any one calendar year.

(2)(B) A judge of the Court of Appeals demonstrates satisfactory performance by:

(2)(B)(i) circulating not more than an average of three principal opinions per calendar year more than six months after submission with no more than half of the maximum exceptional cases in any one calendar year; and

(2)(B)(ii) achieving a final average time to circulation of a principal opinion of not more than 120 days after submission.

(2)(C) A trial court judge demonstrates satisfactory performance by holding:

(2)(C)(i) not more than an average of three cases per calendar year under advisement more than two months after submission with no more than half of the maximum exceptional cases in any one calendar year; and

(2)(C)(ii) no case under advisement more than six months after submission.

(3) Education standard. Satisfactory performance is established if the judge annually obtains 30 hours of judicial education subject to the availability of in-state education programs.

(4) Physical and mental competence. Satisfactory performance is established if the response of the judge demonstrates physical and mental competence to serve in office and if the Council finds the responsive information to be complete and correct. The Council may request a statement by an examining physician.