Home Table of Contents

Rule 5. General Provisions

Arizona Revised Statutes AnnotatedRules of Procedure for Judicial Performance Review in the State of ArizonaEffective: January 1, 2020

Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated
Rules of Procedure for Judicial Performance Review in the State of Arizona (Refs & Annos)
Effective: January 1, 2020
17C A.R.S. Rules of Proc. for Jud. Perf. Review, Rule 5
Rule 5. General Provisions
The following general provisions shall govern the activities and operations of the Commission and the Conference Teams:
(a) Diversity. The Supreme Court shall solicit recommendations from the public to assist it in appointing persons to the Commission. The Chairperson of the Commission shall solicit recommendations from the public to assist in appointing persons to the Conference Teams. These persons shall have outstanding competence and reputation and shall also be sensitive to the needs of and held in high esteem by the communities they will serve. The persons appointed shall reflect, to the extent possible, the geographic, ethnic, racial and gender diversity of those communities. Competence and diversity among the members will enhance fairness and public confidence in the judicial performance review process.
(b) Reimbursement for Expenses. Members of the Commission or any Conference Team shall receive no compensation for services but shall be reimbursed for their travel expenses in accordance with applicable statutes.
(c) Impartiality.
(1) A Commissioner or Conference Team member shall perform his or her duties in an impartial, objective manner.
(2) To preserve impartiality:
(a) When a Commissioner or Conference Team member cannot perform his or her duties in an impartial, objective manner due to a relationship with a reviewed judge (business, personal, attorney-client) or other conflict of interest, bias or prejudice, the member shall inform the Commission or Conference Team of the need to recuse himself or herself from participating in the consideration of the judge.
(b) A Commissioner or Conference Team member is disqualified from taking any action with respect to a judge who is a family member within the third degree of consanguinity.
(c) A judge member of the Commission shall not be eligible to vote with respect to the judge's own performance.
(d) The voter information pamphlet shall identify when a judge member was ineligible to vote with respect to the judge's own performance or that of a family member within the third degree of consanguinity.
(3) A judge member who receives an Invitation to Respond under Rule(6)(f)(3) shall not participate in the Commission for the balance of the then-current cycle.
(4) A Commissioner or Conference Team member shall not be influenced by facts or opinions regarding the reviewed judge other than those that were presented to the Commission or Conference Team during the review process. A Commissioner or Conference Team member shall promptly report to the Commission Chairperson any attempt by any person or organization to influence him or her other than by fact or opinion.
(5) Each reviewed judge shall have the right to challenge for cause any Commissioner or Conference Team member as to whom the reviewed judge alleges that there is a cause for conflict of interest, bias or prejudice. Any such challenge to a Commissioner shall be in writing and filed with the office of the Commission at least 60 days before the Commission's public vote during the year in which the reviewed judge is standing for retention. Any such challenge to a Conference Team member shall be filed with the office of the Commission within 5 days of actual notice to the judge of the Conference Team members. The Supreme Court, or a justice designated by the Court to do so, shall rule upon such challenges for cause, on the written challenge and the written response thereto, if any.
(d) Background Checks. Background checks pursuant to A.R.S. ยง 41-1750(G)(2) may be required of all Commissioners and Conference Team members.

Credits

Promulgated on an emergency basis effective May 26, 1993, adopted in final form July 8, 1993. Amended Sept. 30, 1993, emergency effective. Adopted in final form Jan. 26, 1994. Amended Feb. 27, 1996, effective Feb. 9, 1996; Jan. 26, 2004, effective June 1, 2004; Jan. 20, 2006, effective June 1, 2006; amended on an emergency basis Aug. 27, 2019, effective Sept. 1, 2019, adopted on a permanent basis Dec. 12, 2019.
17C A. R. S. Rules of Proc. for Jud. Perf. Review, Rule 5, AZ ST J PERF REVIEW Rule 5
State Court Rules are current with amendments received through 11/1/21. The Code of Judicial Administration is current with amendments received through 11/1/21.
End of Document