Home Judicial Performance Evaluations 2018 Full List Judge Herron

Eighteenth Judicial District - District Judge


Reports:
2018 Retention Survey Report
2017 Interim Survey Report

Honorable Patricia Herron

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 Eighteenth Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance unanimously (10-0) agrees that Judge Patricia Herron MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Judge Herron was appointed to District Court in the Eighteenth Judicial District in January of 2016. Prior to appointment Judge Herron served as a Senior Assistant Attorney General in the litigation division and received multiple accommodations for outstanding work while there. While working as a Senior Assistant Attorney General, she was also a part time municipal judge in the Aurora Municipal Court. She earned her undergraduate degree from the University of Oklahoma in 1975, and her law degree from University of Tulsa College of Law in 1979. She served as Chief District Court Judge in Oklahoma and was appointed as the Presiding Judge in the highest tax appeal court in the state — the Court of Tax Review. Judge Herron serves as a judge for the moot court competitions at DU College of Law and can occasionally be seen swinging a hammer at a habitat for humanity location or preparing items for giving at the Santa Clause shop.

The Commission reviews survey responses from attorneys and non-attorneys who had experience with Judge Herron, reviewed opinions that she authored, observed her in the courtroom, interviewed her personally, reviewed her self-evaluation, and interviewed other interested parties. Among the survey questions was, “Based on your responses to the previous questions related to the performance evaluation criteria, do you think Judge Herron meets judicial performance standards?” Of the 14 attorneys who answered the survey, 85% answered that she did meet performance standards, 8% said no, does not meet performance standards, and 8% had no opinion (these percentages may not total 100% due to rounding). Of the 42 non-attorneys who responded to the judicial performance surveys, 91% answered that yes, she meets performance standards, 7% said no, does not meet performance standards, and 2% had no opinion. 

Judge Herron presides over all aspects of a felony criminal docket. Based on the Commission’s overall evaluation Judge Herron has demonstrated that she meets or exceeds performance standards in all categories. Judge Herron’s scores by both attorneys and non-attorneys were strong in all areas including judicial temperament, communication, and demeanor. Slightly less strong, but still above the average for district court judges, were application and knowledge of the law and case management. Judge Herron has taken steps to improve case management, and is, indeed, improving. Many of those who responded to the surveys remarked that she is “hard working,” “kind,” “respectful,” and “thoughtful.” Commissioners observed these traits during their courtroom observations and interview with Judge Herron. Based on these findings the Commission unanimously agrees that Judge Patricia Herron meets performance standards.