Andrew Poland at a glance
- Current role
- Judge
- Jurisdiction
- Colorado · State
- Judicial service
- Active
Andrew Poland
Judge · 1st Judicial District District Court
Official statewide and applicable court procedural guidance applies to this judge.
Available research
Applicable Court Rules & Procedures2 sourced items · labeled by scope
SourcesOfficial and public records supporting this profile
Judicial Performance Evaluation
Meets Performance Standards
Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation / applicable Commission on Judicial Performance · 2026 · 1st Judicial District District Court · District Court Judge
9 For / primary
0 Against / secondary
Published measures
Case Management: Responses Promptly issues a decision on the case after
Overall: 3.3 / 4 (N=19)Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=19)
Case Management: trial. Maintains appropriate control over proceedings.
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=27)Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=27)Non-Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=27)
Case Management: Promptly rules on pre-trial motions.
Overall: 3.2 / 4 (N=18)Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=18)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=18)
Case Management: Sets reasonable schedules for cases.
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=23)Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=23)Non-Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=23)
Case Management: Provides an alternative to in-person hearings
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=16)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=16)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=16)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Responses Is able to identify and analyze relevant facts.
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=26)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=26)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=26)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Bases decisions on evidence and arguments.
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=10)Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=10)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Issues consistent decisions when the
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=7)
Application and Knowledge of Law: circumstances are similar. Rulings cite the applicable substantive law.
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=11)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=11)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Consistently applies laws and rules.
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=9)Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=9)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Gives reasons for rulings.
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=21)Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=21)Non-Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=21)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Willing to make decisions without regard to
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=10)Non-Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=10)
Communications: Responses Makes sure all participants understand the
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=25)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=25)Non-Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=25)
Communications: proceedings. When issuing a ruling, the judge provides an
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=11)Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=11)
Communications: explanation for the decision. Provides written communications that are clear,
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=7)
Communications: thorough, and well- reasoned. Listens carefully during court proceedings.
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=9)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=9)
Communications: Uses language that everyone can understand.
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=15)
Communications: Speaks clearly so everyone in the courtroom
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=15)
Communications: can understand what's being said. Gives reasons for a ruling when needed.
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)
Demeanor: Responses Gives proceedings a sense of dignity.
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=25)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=25)Non-Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=25)
Demeanor: Treats participants with respect.
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=25)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=25)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=25)
Demeanor: Reacts to an incident(s) in the courtroom
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=6)Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=6)
Demeanor: appropriately. Addresses individuals (e.g. attorneys, court staff, litigants, public witnesses) respectfully in
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=10)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=10)
Demeanor: the courtroom. Maintains a professional demeanor in the
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=10)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=10)
Demeanor: courtroom. Has a sense of compassion and human
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=15)
Diligence: Responses Uses good judgment in application of relevant
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=11)Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=11)
Diligence: law and rules. Is willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=7)
Diligence: consuming. Does the necessary “homework” and is
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=11)Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=11)
Diligence: prepared for cases. Begins court on time.
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=15)
Diligence: Maintains appropriate control over proceedings.
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=15)
Diligence: Sets reasonable schedules for cases.
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=13)Non-Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=13)
Diligence: Is prepared for cases
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=14)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=14)
Diligence: Manages court proceedings so there is little
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)
Fairness: Responses Gives participants an opportunity to be heard.
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)
Fairness: Treats those involved in the case without bias.
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)
Fairness: Treats people fairly who represent themselves.
Overall: 4 / 4 (N=8)Non-Attorneys: 4 / 4 (N=8)
Fairness: Gives each side enough time to present their
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)Non-Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=15)Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=9)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=9)
Fairness: case. Conducts their courtroom in a neutral manner.
Overall: 3.8 / 4 (N=10)Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=10)
Fairness: Is fair and impartial to both sides.
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=10)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=10)
Published standards
Colorado statutory judicial performance standards
The First Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance (the Commission) unanimously agrees by a vote of 9-0 (One Commissioner recused because the Commissioner is a party to a case pending before Judge Poland) that Judge Andrew C. Poland MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .
Participation
Attorney email invite
13 returned / 499 distributed
Attorney Survey Website
0 returned
Total Attorneys
13 returned
Non-attorney email Invite
4 returned / 295 distributed
Court Staff Email Invite (Self-select)
2 returned / 2,782 distributed
Citizen Feedback
0 returned
Juror Survey
9 returned
Total Non-Attorneys
15 returned
Commission narrative
The First Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance (the Commission) unanimously agrees by a vote of 9-0 (One Commissioner recused because the Commissioner is a party to a case pending before Judge Poland) that Judge Andrew C. Poland MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .
Judge Poland is a District Court Judge in Jefferson County, appointed on June 2, 2024, and presides over a mixed docket consisting of criminal (30%), civil (40%) and domestic relations matters (30%). Feedback for Judge Poland’s performance was provided by parties, attorneys, and jurors appearing before him in court and by peers, based on his integrity, legal knowledge, communication skills, judicial temperament, administrative performance, and service to the community. Feedback recognized Judge Poland’s steady growth during his first two years on the district court bench. He was recognized for managing his courtroom, having a fair and even temperament, being deliberate, clearly explaining his rulings, and being effective in case management. Judge Poland was also described as demonstrating meaningful growth in the role, with continued opportunity to further develop and refine his legal analysis as he gains experience across a broad district court docket. Judge Poland takes all feedback and suggestions for performance improvement seriously and collaborates with his mentors and staff to address issues. Judge Poland is active in many judicial and community service initiatives including serving on the Board of Governors for the 1st Judicial District Bar Association, coordinating projects through Jefferson County Open Space and volunteering for Jefferson County High School Mock Trials.
In conducting its evaluation of Judge Poland’s performance, the Commission conducted a personal interview, observed him in court, and reviewed the 2025–2026 survey responses from attorneys and non-attorneys appearing before him. The Commission additionally received feedback from the chief judge, the district attorney, and the head of the Public Defender’s Office. The Commission also reviewed Judge Poland’s self-evaluation, and three orders involving matters for which he has ruled. After completing the above reviews, the Commission finds Judge Poland meets performance criteria.
Judge Poland is a native of Jefferson County, CO. He earned his Bachelor of Science degree in 2009 from Colorado State University and Juris Doctorate in 2011 from Thomas Jefferson School of Law. Prior to being appointed District Court Judge, Judge Poland practiced law privately from 2012 to 2023, focusing on juvenile defense and child welfare litigation. He served as an Instructor at Metropolitan State University from 2021 to 2023 teaching Legal Issues in Social Work Practice before serving as Magistrate in the 1st Judicial District from 2023 to 2024. His professional background reflects longstanding service to children, families, and the Jefferson County community.
Applicable Court Rules & Procedures
Expanded Media Coverage
Statewide
Colorado expanded media coverage requests must comply with Chapter 38, Rule 3 and are submitted to the court before the proceeding; authorization remains subject to court rules, orders, restrictions, and limitations.
you agree with the criteria set forth in Chapter 38, Rule 3, as well as all orders, rules, restrictions, or limitations issued or imposed by the courtRequest for Expanded Media Coverage ↗
Expanded Media Notice
Statewide
Colorado expanded media coverage applications generally must be submitted at least twenty-four hours before the court proceeding, though judges may consider shorter-notice requests in some circumstances.
Expanded Media Coverage applications to be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the court proceeding in question.Request for Expanded Media Coverage ↗
Sources
Colorado Judicial Branch official judicial roster
Identity source · HTML · checked July 26, 2026
View Colorado Judicial Branch official judicial roster ↗Request for Expanded Media Coverage
Statewide source · HTML · checked July 26, 2026
View Request for Expanded Media Coverage ↗