DAR File No. 41027

This rule was published in the December 15, 2016, issue (Vol. 2016, No. 24) of the Utah State Bulletin.


Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission, Administration

Section R597-3-9

Judicial Discipline

Notice of Proposed Rule

(Amendment)

DAR File No.: 41027
Filed: 11/17/2016 05:01:10 PM

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

In order for the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) to provide a credible evaluation of a judge, it needs to be able to consider any public sanctions of a judge that occur up until it votes on whether a judge should be recommended for retention.

Summary of the rule or change:

The rule expands the time period in which JPEC may consider a public sanction of a judge issued by the Utah Supreme Court. Under the rule, JPEC may consider a public sanction that is issued during the judge's evaluation cycle and after the evaluation cycle is completed and until the commission votes on whether to recommend the judge for retention.

Statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

  • Section 78A-12-205

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

This change has no impact on state budget because it only expands an evaluation period for one JPEC performance standard, judicial discipline.

local governments:

This change has no impact on local government because it only expands an evaluation for one JPEC performance standard, judicial discipline.

small businesses:

The commission has no authority with respect to small businesses and no dealings with small businesses; consequently, there is no impact on such entities.

persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:

The only affected persons are judges about whom the Supreme Court has issued a public sanction and who are subject to a JPEC evaluation.

Compliance costs for affected persons:

This rule expands an evaluation period for a JPEC performance standard. There are no associated compliance costs.

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

It is my opinion that application of this amendment will not create any fiscal impact.

John Ashton, Commission Chair

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Office of Administrative Rules, or at:

Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission
Administration
Room B-330 SENATE BUILDING
420 N STATE ST
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

  • Jennifer Yim at the above address, by phone at , by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at jyim@utah.gov

Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:

01/17/2017

This rule may become effective on:

01/24/2017

Authorized by:

John Ashton, Chair

RULE TEXT

R597. Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission, Administration.

R597-3. Judicial Performance Evaluations.

R597-3-9. Judicial Discipline.

(1) For the purposes of judicial performance evaluation and pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 78A-12-205, the commission shall consider any public sanction of a judge issued by the Supreme Court during the judge's current term, including:

(a) During the judge's midterm and retention evaluation cycles and

(b) After the end of the judge's retention evaluation cycle until the commission votes whether to recommend the judge for retention.

 

KEY: judicial performance evaluations, judges, evaluation cycles, surveys

Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: [April 20, 2016]2017

Notice of Continuation: February 17, 2014

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 78A-12


Additional Information

More information about a Notice of Proposed Rule is available online.

The Portable Document Format (PDF) version of the Bulletin is the official version. The PDF version of this issue is available at https://rules.utah.gov/publicat/bull-pdf/2016/b20161215.pdf. The HTML edition of the Bulletin is a convenience copy. Any discrepancy between the PDF version and HTML version is resolved in favor of the PDF version.

Text to be deleted is struck through and surrounded by brackets ([example]). Text to be added is underlined (example).  Older browsers may not depict some or any of these attributes on the screen or when the document is printed.

For questions regarding the content or application of this rule, please contact Jennifer Yim at the above address, by phone at , by FAX at , or by Internet E-mail at jyim@utah.gov.  For questions about the rulemaking process, please contact the Office of Administrative Rules.