Ninth Judicial District Judge Angela M. Roff is the only Colorado judge who failed to meet performance standards up for retention in November’s election, according to a recent evaluation by the Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation. In a 4-3 vote, the commission found that while Roff demonstrated strengths in areas like integrity and impartiality, her legal knowledge and administrative performance fell short of expectations.

The commission, which evaluates judges based on criteria such as integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, and administrative performance, determined that Roff’s interpretation and application of the law were inconsistent. Her judicial temperament was also called into question, with concerns raised about her discomfort in handling certain defendant situations.

 Roff was appointed by Gov. Jared Polis to be the new Garfield County Court judge in 2022, and served as an associate attorney at the Law Offices of Paul Gertz, PC from 2007 to 2011. Prior to that, she was a judge advocate with the U.S. Air Force’s Department of the Judge Advocate General, Air Combat Command, from 2002 to 2007.

Roff has worked as a contract prosecutor for municipalities such as Carbondale and New Castle. She also served as a liquor and marijuana license hearing officer for the city of Glenwood Springs in the mid-2010s. Roff earned her bachelor’s degree from the University of New Mexico in 1998 and her law degree from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law in 2001.

“Judge Roff exhibits some strengths, particularly with regards to her integrity and compassion,” the commission’s report noted. However, they added that her legal knowledge and administrative efficiency need further development.

Since her last evaluation, Roff has made efforts to improve, particularly in managing her docket, the report stated. The commission acknowledged her progress but maintained that she still struggles with efficiency in handling cases. Despite these challenges, some commissioners expressed optimism about her ability to meet the required standards with continued improvement.

In response to the evaluation, Roff defended her work on the bench and outlined steps she has taken to address the commission’s concerns.

“This job is a privilege to hold, and I acknowledge the Commission’s comments, favorable and unfavorable,” Roff said in the commission report. “Case closure rates have improved by 59%, and only 13% of my 630 open cases are older than six months—the benchmark is 20%.” She also noted that her appeal rate remains under half a percent, with no cases overturned due to her application of the law.

The evaluation process included interviews with Roff, a review of her legal opinions, courtroom observations, and input from attorneys and court staff.

Despite the mixed evaluation, some commissioners believe Roff has the potential to meet performance standards with additional support and a clear improvement plan. The final decision on her future as a judge will be made by voters on Nov. 5.