The Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline received 473 misconduct complaints about judges in 2025, which was nearly 29% higher than in 2024 and substantially greater than any time in the past decade.

However, only 31 complaints were referred to the commission for further action after an initial screening, the organization noted in its annual report released on Tuesday. As in prior years, the vast majority of complaints pertained to judges’ rulings, which must typically be challenged on appeal, not through the disciplinary process.

The commission’s report largely mirrored what executive director Anne Mangiardi told members of the legislature’s judiciary committees in January during annual oversight hearings.

“I think this increase is positive and there’s a couple of factors that are going on. One is that we are in the press,” she said. “More people know we exist.”

She also attributed the increased number of reports to the commission’s updated website, which now has an online complaint form. Further, reports are coming from “high-quality” sources in greater numbers.

“Attorneys, public defenders, district attorneys, other court staff like probation officers and interpreters. Those people who are in courtrooms every day,” Mangiardi said. “We are getting a level of trust with that group of legal professionals and that is really positive.”

The commission’s biggest concern is complaints about delayed rulings, Mangiardi told lawmakers. Commonly, the commission will hear that a judge is overworked and has let a case fall through the cracks.

“Rural judges struggle in different ways than judges in urban jurisdictions. They tend to have different kinds of experience coming onto the bench. But more importantly, they don’t have that kind of built-in mentorship,” she said. “They’re not around their colleagues all the time.”

The commission’s annual report contained new information about the discipline privately imposed on judges whose courtroom behavior was problematic. In 2025, three unidentified judges received private reprimands or censures.

One judge ordered a competency evaluation for a criminal defendant in a “minor criminal matter where the defendant’s in-court conduct showed that order was unwarranted,” the commission wrote. The judge then “unnecessarily escalated the situation by repeatedly asking the defendant questions but not allowing the defendant an opportunity to answer those questions.”

A second judge issued a ruling based on an “unfounded” factual conclusion in a criminal case. The judge was “disrespectful to both the defendant and counsel and repeatedly interrupted counsel and the defendant,” wrote the commission.

Finally, a third judge lost their temper with a self-represented litigant. The judge “screamed at the litigant” and threatened to decide a case-ending motion in the other side’s favor, even though no such motion existed.

The commission’s report also disclosed that it dismissed three cases “with concern” last year. The commission takes that step when “personalized communication with a judge regarding their ethical obligations would be illuminating or helpful,” but their conduct does not warrant discipline.

In addition to the commission’s anonymous interventions, three trial judges underwent public disciplinary proceedings last year, and two have left the bench.

District Court Judge Justin B. Haenlein of Northeastern Colorado resigned following multiple instances of misconduct that included giving legal advice to a former client, failing to disclose a personal relationship when that same client appeared before him as a criminal defendant, and failing to recuse from the case of the client’s boyfriend.

San Miguel County Court Judge Sean K. Murphy also resigned after the commission learned that undisclosed health issues affected his conduct, including his extreme delays in issuing rulings.

The proceedings against Montezuma County Court Judge Ian J. MacLaren are still pending, related to his handling of a criminal case and his interaction with law enforcement stemming from his failure to register his boat as instructed. The discipline commission’s website shows that the three-member panel assigned to adjudicate his case has still not responded to a procedural motion that has been awaiting action since November.

The commission’s report indicated that the Fourth Judicial District of El Paso and Teller counties generated the highest number of misconduct complaints. It is also the most populous of the state’s 23 judicial districts. Mangiardi, during her presentation to the legislative judiciary committees, said there was nothing abnormal happening in the jurisdiction to her knowledge.