Home Judicial Performance Evaluations 2018 Full List Judge Quick

Seventeenth Judicial District - District Judge


Reports:
2018 Retention Survey Report
2017 Interim Survey Report

Honorable Donald S. Quick

Retention year: 2018
Recommendation: Meets Performance Standard

Areas of Evaluation 0 1 2 3 4
Case Management
Application & Knowledge of Law
Communications
Diligence
Demeanor
Fairness
Attorneys
Non Attorneys

The Seventeenth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously (10-0) agrees that the Honorable Donald S. Quick MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Judge Quick served as District Attorney for the 17th Judicial District from 2005 through 2013, and has been in multiple roles for that office, including Chief Deputy District Attorney, Chief Trial Deputy District Attorney, and Deputy District Attorney. He was also Chief Deputy Attorney General (2002-2005) and Deputy Attorney General for the Criminal Justice Section (1999-2004). Before entering government service, Judge Quick was an associate attorney for Coastal Corporation and for Burns, Wall, Smith, and Mueller, P.C. He earned his undergraduate degree from University of Colorado in 1982 and his Juris Doctor from the University of Colorado School of Law in 1986. Judge Quick has always been passionate about issues involving youth. He previously served on the state board for the Boy’s and Girl’s Club and currently serves on the Adams County Youth Initiative Advisory Board. 
 
The Commission conducted a personal interview with Judge Quick, reviewed opinions he authored, observed him in court, reviewed comments received from interested parties during the evaluation, and reviewed survey responses from attorneys and non-attorneys who had experience with Judge Quick.  Those surveyed were asked, "based on your responses to the previous questions related to the performance evaluation criteria, do you think Judge Quick meets judicial performance standards?" Of the attorneys responding to the survey, 76% answered that he meets performance standards, 16% answered that he does not, and 8% had no opinion regarding whether Judge Quick meets or does not meet performance standards. Of non-attorneys responding to the survey, 93% answered that he meets performance standards, 3% answered that he does not, and 4% had no opinion regarding whether Judge Quick meets or does not meet performance standards. A total of thirty-nine attorneys and ninety-eight non-attorneys responded to the surveys.

During this term, Judge Quick presided over both a domestic relations docket and a felony criminal docket. Based upon the Commission’s overall evaluation, Judge Quick demonstrated that he either met or exceeded performed standards in all categories. Judge Quick’s highest evaluation scores were in the areas of communications and demeanor. Respondents to the survey were most critical of his docket management. Judge Quick was often described as smart and fair as well as kind and personable. The Commission also found Judge Quick to be kind and personable and believe he has demonstrated a strong commitment to the community and the quality of his work. Based upon these findings, the Commission unanimously agreed that Judge Quick meets performance standards.