Craig P. Henderson at a glance
- Current role
- Judge
- Jurisdiction
- Colorado · State
- Judicial service
- Active
Craig P. Henderson
Judge · 21st 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 · 21st Judicial District District Court · District Court Judge
8 For / primary
0 Against / secondary
Published measures
Case Management: Responses Promptly issues a decision on the case after
Overall: 3.2 / 4 (N=14)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=14)Non-Attorneys: 3 / 4 (N=14)
Case Management: trial. Maintains appropriate control over proceedings.
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=19)Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=19)
Case Management: Promptly rules on pre-trial motions.
Overall: 3.2 / 4 (N=17)Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=17)Non-Attorneys: 3.1 / 4 (N=17)
Case Management: Sets reasonable schedules for cases.
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=19)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=19)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=19)
Case Management: Provides an alternative to in-person hearings
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=14)Attorneys: 4 / 4 (N=14)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=14)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Responses Is able to identify and analyze relevant facts.
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=20)Non-Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=20)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Bases decisions on evidence and arguments.
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Issues consistent decisions when the
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)
Application and Knowledge of Law: circumstances are similar. Rulings cite the applicable substantive law.
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=8)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Consistently applies laws and rules.
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Gives reasons for rulings.
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=17)Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=17)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=17)
Application and Knowledge of Law: Willing to make decisions without regard to
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)
Communications: Responses Makes sure all participants understand the
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 3.8 / 4 (N=20)Non-Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=20)
Communications: proceedings. When issuing a ruling, the judge provides an
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=8)
Communications: explanation for the decision. Provides written communications that are clear,
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=8)
Communications: thorough, and well- reasoned. Listens carefully during court proceedings.
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=8)
Communications: Uses language that everyone can understand.
Overall: 3.5 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=12)
Communications: Speaks clearly so everyone in the courtroom
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=12)
Communications: can understand what's being said. Gives reasons for a ruling when needed.
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)
Demeanor: Responses Gives proceedings a sense of dignity.
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=20)Non-Attorneys: 3.5 / 4 (N=20)
Demeanor: Treats participants with respect.
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=20)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=20)Non-Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=20)
Demeanor: Reacts to an incident(s) in the courtroom
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=8)
Demeanor: appropriately. Addresses individuals (e.g. attorneys, court staff, litigants, public witnesses) respectfully in
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=8)
Demeanor: the courtroom. Maintains a professional demeanor in the
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=8)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=8)
Demeanor: courtroom. Has a sense of compassion and human
Overall: 3.6 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.6 / 4 (N=12)
Diligence: Responses Uses good judgment in application of relevant
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=7)
Diligence: law and rules. Is willing to handle cases on the docket even when they are complicated and time
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=6)Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=6)
Diligence: consuming. Does the necessary “homework” and is
Overall: 3.7 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 3.7 / 4 (N=7)
Diligence: prepared for cases. Begins court on time.
Overall: 3.2 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=12)
Diligence: Maintains appropriate control over proceedings.
Overall: 3.3 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.3 / 4 (N=12)
Diligence: Sets reasonable schedules for cases.
Overall: 3.3 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.3 / 4 (N=12)
Diligence: Is prepared for cases
Overall: 3.2 / 4 (N=11)Non-Attorneys: 3.2 / 4 (N=11)
Diligence: Manages court proceedings so there is little
Overall: 3.3 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.3 / 4 (N=12)
Fairness: Responses Gives participants an opportunity to be heard.
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)
Fairness: Treats those involved in the case without bias.
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=11)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=11)
Fairness: Treats people fairly who represent themselves.
Overall: 3 / 4 (N=7)Non-Attorneys: 3 / 4 (N=7)
Fairness: Gives each side enough time to present their
Overall: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)Non-Attorneys: 3.4 / 4 (N=12)Overall: 4 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 4 / 4 (N=7)
Fairness: case. Conducts their courtroom in a neutral manner.
Overall: 4 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 4 / 4 (N=7)
Fairness: Is fair and impartial to both sides.
Overall: 3.9 / 4 (N=7)Attorneys: 3.9 / 4 (N=7)
Published standards
Colorado statutory judicial performance standards
The Twenty-First Judicial District Judicial Performance Commission unanimously by a vote of 8-0 finds that Judge Craig Peter Henderson MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS . The Commission has one vacancy and one absent commissioner.
Participation
Attorney email invite
8 returned / 318 distributed
Attorney Survey Website
0 returned
Total Attorneys
8 returned
Non-attorney email Invite
3 returned / 609 distributed
Court Staff Email Invite (Self-select)
6 returned / 2,782 distributed
Citizen Feedback
0 returned
Juror Survey
4 returned
Total Non-Attorneys
13 returned
Commission narrative
The Twenty-First Judicial District Judicial Performance Commission unanimously by a vote of 8-0 finds that Judge Craig Peter Henderson MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS . The Commission has one vacancy and one absent commissioner.
By all accounts Judge Henderson has made a smooth transition from being a county court judge to a district court judge. Judge Henderson demonstrates high levels of integrity and good communications skills. Judge Henderson cares about the people in his courtroom as people, not just cases he needs to get through. He takes the time to ensure parties understand what is happening in the courtroom. In criminal cases, he speaks to the defendants to ensure they understand the seriousness of their misconduct while also encouraging them to do better. Judge Henderson has worked throughout his career to improve his judicial temperament and now receives high marks in this area. Judge Henderson has improved his case handling to ensure cases are completed in a timely fashion but has received mixed reviews on issuing timely orders and managing his courtroom schedule. Judge Henderson has recognized his need to continue improving his docketing and calendar management. Judge Henderson has generally been complimented for his legal knowledge but has expressed his own desire for more training in domestic relations, dependency and neglect, and some civil matters and is looking to work such training into his schedule. Overall, the Commission believes that Judge Henderson meets performance standards and is a credit to the bench.
In reaching these conclusions, the Commission considered several sources of information. The Commission considered survey results, case management information, and Judge Henderson’s self-evaluation. The Commission also interviewed attorneys and the Judge, observed Judge Henderson in court, and read opinions he authored. The survey results and interviews were largely consistent with Judge Henderson’s self-evaluation. While there were only 20 survey respondents, they unanimously agreed that Judge Henderson was meeting performance standards.
Judge Craig P. Henderson grew up on the eastern plains of Colorado. He graduated from McPherson College and received his law degree from Washburn University, both in Kansas. In his career as a lawyer, Judge Henderson was mostly a prosecutor but also did a small amount of private practice. He made Mesa County his home in 2002 and worked for the Mesa County District Attorney’s Office as a prosecutor. He was appointed as a Mesa County Court Judge by Governor Bill Owens in 2006 and as a District Court Judge by Governor Jared Polis in 2024.
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 ↗