Rule 10 - Judge's Rights and Responsibilities(a) Cooperation. A judge is expected to cooperate with and respond to communications from the Commission and Conference Team.(b) Fair and Impartial Treatment. A judge is entitled to receive fair and impartial treatment from the Commission and Conference Team, including enforcement of the rules safeguarding the process from improper influence and protecting the judge's confidentiality.(c) Right to Be Heard.(1)Executive Session. Before any Commission member may vote that the judge does not meet the Rule 5(a) judicial performance standards sufficient for retention in office, a judge must be invited to meet with the Commission in executive session under Rule 4(b)(2).(2)Written Comments. A judge receiving an invitation to meet with the Commission in executive session has the right to submit confidential written comments to the Commission, to appear and be heard in an executive session held on a day before the day of the public vote, or both. The fact that a judge only submits written comments and does not appear in executive session should not be considered in determining whether the judge has cooperated or whether the judge meets the performance standards for retention.(d) Data Validity. To the extent possible, the Commission is expected to use generally accepted statistical methods and techniques. If any information the Commission receives about a judge under Rule 5(c) was obtained or compiled in a manner inconsistent with generally accepted statistical methods and techniques or the Commission deems it unduly prejudicial or otherwise unreliable, the Commission must prominently disclose these facts and the reasons the data or other information is flawed in its report under Rule 5(c)(1) and in any dissemination under Rule 7(b). The Commission may not publish statistical data about a judge that does not have an appropriate confidence level.(e) Challenges.(1)Peremptory Challenge. Once each odd-numbered year, within 5 days of receiving actual notice of the assigned Conference Team, the judge being reviewed may peremptorily challenge one member of the Conference Team by filing notice with the Commission. The Commission Chair will decide any questions or disputes arising under this provision.(2)Challenge for Cause. Each judge being reviewed has the right to challenge any Commission or Conference Team member for cause for conflict of interest, bias, or prejudice. (A) Any such challenge to a Commission member must be in writing and filed with the Commission at least 60 days before the Commission's public vote during the year in which the judge is eligible for retention.(B) Any such challenge to a Conference Team member must be in writing and filed with the Commission within 5 days of the judge receiving actual notice of the Conference Team members.(C) Challenges for cause will be resolved by the Supreme Court, or a justice designated by the Court for this purpose, after consideration of the written challenge and any written response.(f) Review Forms. If the Commission determines that a judge does not meet the judicial performance standards for retention, the judge has the right to review duplicate survey forms, excluding the narrative comments.Ariz. R. P. Jud. Perfor. Rev. 10
Adopted Aug. 24, 2023, effective 10/1/2023.