Need help with accessibility? Click the link for more information - Accessibility Page

1

Spriggs, Richard 1996 Evaluation

#FFFFFF

Second Judicial District - District Court Judge

Honorable Richard Spriggs

Retention Year: 1996
Recommendation: Retain

#FFFFFF

The Judicial Performance Commission of the Second Judicial District recommends that Judge Spriggs BE RETAINED.

Judge Richard Spriggs was admitted to the practice of law in Colorado in 1961. He received a Bachelor of Arts in English Literature from Colgate University in 1958 and a law degree from Cornell University in 1961. Prior to his appointment to the Denver District Court bench in 1988, Judge Spriggs had extensive experience as both a public prosecuting attorney and a litigation attorney in private law firms, including the following; assistant United States attorney for the District of Colorado from 1965 to 1968 and again from 1983 to 1985; United States Department of Justice in the organized crime and racketeering section in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania from 1968 to 1971; assistant attorney general for the State of Colorado from 1971 to 1972; and chief deputy district attorney for the City and County of Denver.

Since his appointment to the bench, Judge Spriggs has served in the civil, domestic relations and criminal courts and is currently hearing criminal cases. He has presided over several high-profile cases during the last several years, in which Judge Spriggs skillfully managed the substantial media and public interest in the court proceedings. Judge Spriggs is very concerned about the tremendous increase in violent crime among youths.

The comments to Judge Spriggs’ evaluations were generally very positive, praising particularly his overall performance, no-nonsense approach and sense of humor and humanness.

Attorney survey responses rated Judge Spriggs very highly in all areas of judicial performance, except courtesy, in which he was rated average.

Written survey results showed that 93.8% of attorneys, 66% of courthouse personnel, and 95% of jurors favored retention; 3.1% of attorneys and 10.6% of courthouse personnel favored non-retention; and 3.1% of attorneys, 23.4% of courthouse personnel and 5% of jurors had not opinion.