Chantel Contiguglia at a glance
- Current role
- Judge
- Jurisdiction
- Colorado · State
- Judicial service
- Active
Chantel Contiguglia
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
Published measures
Case Management: Responses Promptly issues a decision on the case after
Overall: 2.9 / 4 (N=29)Attorneys: 2.7 / 4 (N=29)Non-Attorneys: 3 / 4 (N=29)
Case Management: trial. Maintains appropriate control over proceedings.
Overall: 2.7 / 4 (N=41)Attorneys: 2.4 / 4 (N=41)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=41)
Case Management: Promptly rules on pre-trial motions.
Overall: 2.8 / 4 (N=33)Attorneys: 2.6 / 4 (N=33)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=33)
Case Management: Sets reasonable schedules for cases.
Overall: 2.2 / 4 (N=39)Attorneys: 1.5 / 4 (N=39)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=39)
Case Management: Provides an alternative to in-person hearings
Overall: 3 / 4 (N=32)Attorneys: 2.8 / 4 (N=32)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=32)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Responses Is able to identify and analyze relevant facts.
Overall: 2.4 / 4 (N=37)Attorneys: 1.9 / 4 (N=37)Non-Attorneys: 2.9 / 4 (N=37)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Bases decisions on evidence and arguments.
Overall: 1.8 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 1.8 / 4 (N=20)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Issues consistent decisions when the
Overall: 1.9 / 4 (N=12)Attorneys: 1.9 / 4 (N=12)
Application and Knowledge of Law: circumstances are similar. Rulings cite the applicable substantive law.
Overall: 2.2 / 4 (N=18)Attorneys: 2.2 / 4 (N=18)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Consistently applies laws and rules.
Overall: 1.9 / 4 (N=17)Attorneys: 1.9 / 4 (N=17)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Gives reasons for rulings.
Overall: 2.7 / 4 (N=24)Attorneys: 2.3 / 4 (N=24)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=24)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Willing to make decisions without regard to
Overall: 2.9 / 4 (N=17)Non-Attorneys: 2.9 / 4 (N=17)
Communications: Responses Makes sure all participants understand the
Overall: 2.8 / 4 (N=37)Attorneys: 2.3 / 4 (N=37)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=37)
Communications: proceedings. When issuing a ruling, the judge provides an
Overall: 2 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 2 / 4 (N=20)
Communications: explanation for the decision. Provides written communications that are clear,
Overall: 2 / 4 (N=19)Attorneys: 2 / 4 (N=19)
Communications: thorough, and well- reasoned. Listens carefully during court proceedings.
Overall: 2 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 2 / 4 (N=20)
Communications: Uses language that everyone can understand.
Overall: 3.1 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=19)
Communications: Speaks clearly so everyone in the courtroom
Overall: 3.3 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3.3 / 4 (N=19)
Communications: can understand what's being said. Gives reasons for a ruling when needed.
Overall: 2.8 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 2.8 / 4 (N=19)
Demeanor: Responses Gives proceedings a sense of dignity.
Overall: 2.8 / 4 (N=38)Attorneys: 2.5 / 4 (N=38)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=38)
Demeanor: Treats participants with respect.
Overall: 2.6 / 4 (N=38)Attorneys: 2.1 / 4 (N=38)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=38)
Demeanor: Reacts to an incident(s) in the courtroom
Overall: 2.3 / 4 (N=13)Attorneys: 2.3 / 4 (N=13)
Demeanor: appropriately. Addresses individuals (e.g. attorneys, court staff, litigants, public witnesses) respectfully in
Overall: 2.3 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 2.3 / 4 (N=20)
Demeanor: the courtroom. Maintains a professional demeanor in the
Overall: 2.4 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 2.4 / 4 (N=20)
Demeanor: courtroom. Has a sense of compassion and human
Overall: 2.9 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 2.9 / 4 (N=19)
Diligence: Responses Uses good judgment in application of relevant
Overall: 1.7 / 4 (N=19)Attorneys: 1.7 / 4 (N=19)
Diligence: law and rules. Is willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time
Overall: 2.3 / 4 (N=16)Attorneys: 2.3 / 4 (N=16)
Diligence: consuming. Does the necessary “homework” and is
Overall: 2.1 / 4 (N=18)Attorneys: 2.1 / 4 (N=18)
Diligence: prepared for cases. Begins court on time.
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=19)
Diligence: Maintains appropriate control over proceedings.
Overall: 3.1 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=19)
Diligence: Sets reasonable schedules for cases.
Overall: 3.3 / 4 (N=18)Non-Attorneys: 3.3 / 4 (N=18)
Diligence: Is prepared for cases
Overall: 3.1 / 4 (N=18)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=18)
Diligence: Manages court proceedings so there is little
Overall: 3 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3 / 4 (N=19)
Fairness: Responses Gives participants an opportunity to be heard.
Overall: 2.9 / 4 (N=18)Non-Attorneys: 2.9 / 4 (N=18)
Fairness: Treats those involved in the case without bias.
Overall: 2.9 / 4 (N=18)Non-Attorneys: 2.9 / 4 (N=18)
Fairness: Treats people fairly who represent themselves.
Overall: 3.3 / 4 (N=11)Non-Attorneys: 3.3 / 4 (N=11)
Fairness: Gives each side enough time to present their
Overall: 2.8 / 4 (N=18)Non-Attorneys: 2.8 / 4 (N=18)Overall: 2.1 / 4 (N=17)Attorneys: 2.1 / 4 (N=17)
Fairness: case. Conducts their courtroom in a neutral manner.
Overall: 2.3 / 4 (N=18)Attorneys: 2.3 / 4 (N=18)
Fairness: Is fair and impartial to both sides.
Overall: 2.1 / 4 (N=18)Attorneys: 2.1 / 4 (N=18)
Published standards
Colorado statutory judicial performance standards
Meets Performance Standards
Participation
Attorney email invite
22 returned / 561 distributed
Attorney Survey Website
0 returned
Total Attorneys
22 returned
Non-attorney email Invite
11 returned / 323 distributed
Court Staff Email Invite (Self-select)
2 returned / 2,782 distributed
Citizen Feedback
0 returned
Juror Survey
7 returned
Total Non-Attorneys
20 returned
Commission narrative
Judge Contiguglia was appointed to the District Court in Jefferson County on January 1, 2024. She presides over a mixed docket of criminal, civil and domestic relations matters. Judge Contiguglia has been described as prepared, fair, consistent, and respectful with good judicial demeanor and temperament. She is thoughtful and sets clear deadlines and expectations. Her case management was described as efficient; however it was noted her scheduling practices could be inflexible for trial and docket management, which has been perceived by some litigants to overlook practical needs of the parties. During her interim evaluation Judge Contiguglia was given this feedback and since that time, there has been improvement. Judge Contiguglia’s background is predominantly criminal defense work, which is reflected in her acumen with criminal law. Judge Contiguglia is committed to increasing her proficiency in civil and domestic relations law by seeking out colleagues with this expertise and attending continuing legal education in these areas. The Commission finds Judge Contiguglia meets performance standards and is pleased she has committed to increasing her proficiency in civil and domestic relations law.
The commission conducted a personal interview with Judge Contiguglia, reviewed orders she authored, observed her in court, reviewed the judicial performance survey responses from attorneys, non-attorneys, jurors and court staff, and received feedback from the chief judge of the 1st Judicial District, the Office of the District Attorney, and the Office of the State Public Defender. There was a limited number of survey responses for this evaluation period. Five appellate court judges responded to the survey and rated Judge Contiguglia high (4.0 out of 4.0).
Judge Contiguglia grew up in Walden, Colorado, a small town in Jackson County. She earned her Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Mesa State College and her Juris Doctorate from the University of Denver in 2006. Before her current appointment, she served as a County Court Judge in Arapahoe County for six years. Prior to that Judge Contiguglia spent over ten years with the Colorado State Public Defender’s Office. In addition to her public responsibilities, she remains committed to community service, frequently volunteering at local schools, mentoring young attorneys, and participating in programs that support access to justice.
Evaluation history
2019 · 2020 · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 · 2024 · 2025 · Historical cycles are shown separately until instrument compatibility is established.
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 ↗