My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item B: Judicial Evaluation Committee Report
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2006
>
CC Agenda - 05/22/06 Work Session
>
Item B: Judicial Evaluation Committee Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:13:50 PM
Creation date
5/18/2006 8:28:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
5/22/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ATTACHMENT "A" <br />EUGENE MUNICIPAL COURT - 2006 JUDICIAL EVALUATION <br /> <br />Police * Fine <br />* Judge Allen is a proven asset - The City should retain him as long as he allows. <br />* 7a - Marked "Agree" with comments, "Exception, one judge is not competent. Knowledge of <br />the law, court procedures and judicial discretion/impartiality is lacking. <br />* For me this has been the one point of concern regarding Judge Allen. One judge that was appointed <br />made rulings that seemed to be based upon personal feelings and not the facts. Concerns were <br />raised but minimal changewas observed. <br />* I have seen improvement with the performance of a particular judge. I believe this improvement was <br />made by Judge Allen's coaching. <br />* Respect, consistency, fairness. This sums up Judge Allen!! <br />Prosecution * Mostly <br />* They have improved greatly <br />* Judge Allen has continued to provide strong and effective leadership as presiding judge of the court <br />* It's a hard job and he does it well. <br />Staff * The caliber of judges and their training reflects in the way all similar cases are handled in a like and <br />equitable manner by all judges. The consistency of the court process does not change or deviate <br />from judge to judge. Again, a reflection of the great training from all judge staff and the input and <br />discussions held at judge's meetings where supervisory staff provide input and discussion. <br />demonstrates poor decorum inside and outside the courtroom. <br /> <br />Page 7 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.