SURVEY RESULTS - North Carolina Bar Association · This report contains survey results for ... or endorsement of any candidate. 1. ... not know” for the quality or qualities that

Judicial Performance Evaluation Survey – Phase II

SURVEY RESULTSNorth Carolina Bar Association, February 2016

YOUR OPINION COUNTS! Get To Know Your Judicial Candidates Before You Vote.

Welcome to Phase II of the North Carolina Bar Association’s Judicial Performance Evaluation report for the 2016 election cycle. This report contains survey results for non-incumbent Superior Court and District Court candidates who filed for election in December 2015. Phase II also includes judges eligible for election this year who were not included in the Phase I report, which covered Superior and District Court judges elected or appointed before March 31, 2015, whose terms expire in 2016, as well as special Superior Court judges.

For both reports, North Carolina lawyers were surveyed and asked to assess the performance of judges about whom they had sufficient professional contact to evaluate their integrity and impartiality; legal ability; professionalism; communication; administrative skills; and overall performance.

Phase I of the survey was conducted Oct. 5-26, 2015. Phase II was conducted Dec. 23, 2015, through Jan. 20, 2016. The results of these two surveys will be combined in a brief report for the primary election, scheduled March 15. Following the primary, a final report will be produced for the November election.

The reports are provided as a public service by the North Carolina Bar Association and its Judicial Performance Evaluation Committee, and are not intended as a recommendation or endorsement of any candidate. 1

INTRODUCTIONThe Judicial Performance Evaluation (JPE) Committee of the North Carolina Bar Association is pleased to provide this report summarizing the results of Phase II of its survey of North Carolina Superior and District Court judicial candidates. In a 2015 survey conducted from October 5 to October 26 (Phase I), attorneys evaluated sitting Superior and District Court judges elected or appointed to the bench before March 31, 2015, whose terms expire in 2016, as well as Special Superior Court judges. The report of that survey was released in December 2015 and is available at www.electncjudges.org. In a second survey conducted December 23, 2015 to January 20, 2016 (Phase II), attorneys evaluated Superior and District Court judges who were not in Phase I and whose terms expire in 2016 and lawyers who filed as judicial candidates for Superior and District Court.

BACKGROUNDIn 2006, the NCBA’s Administration of Justice Committee produced a report noting the lack of information available to members of the public to enable them to cast an informed vote based on a judge’s performance. The report recommended the creation of the JPE Committee. The NCBA’s Board of Governors followed that recommendation and the JPE Committee was formed in 2008. The committee was charged with creating and administering a survey by which lawyers could evaluate a judge’s performance. Results of the survey could be utilized to provide information for the voting public. The JPE Committee is currently led by attorney Charles Raynal.

The NCBA contracted with BDO USA, LLP, a national accounting firm with local offices in Raleigh, to conduct the survey. BDO USA served as gatekeeper throughout the survey process, ensuring that only persons meeting the survey requirements were allowed to participate and that those who did participate remained anonymous.

The NCBA also employed statistician Larry Nelson, a well-respected retired member of the faculty at North Carolina State University, to evaluate the methodology to ensure that the survey would encourage the most participation possible and generate statistically valid results.

SURVEY DETAILSThe survey asked attorneys with an active North Carolina law license to rate each candidate with whom the attorney had sufficient professional interaction to be able to evaluate the candidate’s performance in the six categories below, using a scale of 5 (excellent), 4 (good), 3 (average), 2 (below average) and 1 (poor):

1. Integrity and Impartiality: Is fair to all persons and refrains from inappropriate ex parte communications. As a lawyer,bases legal arguments on facts and law. As a judge, bases decisions on facts and law;

2. Legal Ability: Demonstrates knowledge of law and rules of procedure and evidence;

3. Professionalism: Exercises patience; is courteous to all and attentive to proceedings; fulfills duties and responsibilities;and upholds the dignity of the court and the legal profession;

4. Communication: Speaks clearly and understandably. As a lawyer, prepares coherent and carefully reviewed papers foruse in-and-out of court. As a judge, prepares coherent decisions and carefully reviews orders before entry;

5. Administrative Skills: Is punctual and prepared; uses time efficiently; meets deadlines appropriately and demonstratesan organized approach to matters. As a judge, enforces deadlines appropriately, makes timely decisions, and entersorders promptly; and

6. Overall Performance: Rate the individual’s overall performance.

If the rating attorney felt that his or her knowledge of a particular candidate was sufficient to rate some but not all of the qualities, the lawyer indicated “do not know” for the quality or qualities that he or she felt unqualified to rate. As a result, the number of responses for a single candidate may vary somewhat among the six categories.

Judicial Performance Evaluation Survey – Phase II

2

To identify those Superior and District Court judges who were not in Phase I and whose terms expire in 2016 and the lawyers who had filed as candidates for the Superior and District Courts, the JPE Committee collected information from the North Carolina State Board of Elections and the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts. A total of 80 individuals were included in the survey. A total of nine judges, two in Superior Court and seven in District Court, were subject to the survey. A total of 71 lawyer candidates were subject to the survey.

A list was compiled of the slightly more than 23,000 lawyers having an active North Carolina law license, and email addresses for approximately 99 percent of those attorneys were identified. Attorneys with email addresses were able to participate in the survey online via an electronic invitation from BDO USA. Attorneys without email addresses; attorneys who notified the NCBA that they did not wish to participate online; attorneys working for the government, including judges, clerks of court, district attorneys and public defenders; and members of the NCBA’s Senior Lawyers Division were provided a paper version of the survey.

On December 23, 2015, BDO USA distributed the survey electronically to each attorney with a known email address. In early January 2016, paper surveys were mailed with an enclosed business reply envelope addressed to and returned directly to BDO USA, who had exclusive access to manage the survey. All survey responses were directed to BDO USA, who protected confidentiality, ensured that each respondent was an eligible attorney and safeguarded against the possibility of multiple responses from one individual.

The survey was open for participation from December 23, 2015 to January 20, 2016. BDO USA compiled the survey results for Professor Nelson, who conducted a statistical analysis. Professor Nelson received anonymous raw data from the survey, which did not identify the candidates. Upon review of the data, Professor Nelson reported that the results were statistically valid for each candidate included in the survey.

SUMMARY OF RESULTSThe total number of responses per candidate varied, reflecting the total number of attorneys who practice in the particular judicial district in which the candidate proposes to serve. The numbers may also be an indication of how well known the candidate is in the legal community.

NAVIGATING THIS REPORTThe information in this report is set out in two distinct sections.

The first section sets forth the summary results for each candidate included in the report. The information in this first section reports the average numerical rating given by attorneys for each of the six categories for which the candidate was evaluated.

The second section provides detailed results for each candidate included in the report. This section reports the total number of attorneys who responded for each candidate and a breakdown of the number of responses in each rating (5 to 1) for each category for each candidate.

In both sections, the Superior Court candidates are listed first and then the District Court candidates, in order by the number of his or her judicial district and in alphabetical order within the district for those districts with two or more candidates.

4 Superior Court Judges Categorical Averages

5 District Court Judge Categorical Averages

7 Individual Superior Court Judge Reports

12 Individual District Court Judge Reports

Table of Contents

3

Judicial Performance Evaluation North Carolina Bar Association February 2016

Candidate Integrity & Impartiality Legal Ability Professionalism Communication Administrative

SkillsOverall

Performance3A - Jeff Foster 4.46 4.36 4.49 4.42 4.20 4.388A - Imelda Pate 3.91 4.37 4.13 3.96 4.17 4.028A - Stuart L. Stroud 4.57 4.50 4.61 4.38 4.49 4.528A - Dal Wooten 4.26 4.23 4.25 4.22 4.23 4.208B - Will Bland 4.39 4.07 4.52 3.53 3.76 3.868B - Jerry Braswell 2.54 2.70 2.64 2.81 2.51 2.4810F - Judge A. Graham Shirley 4.60 4.51 4.65 4.49 4.48 4.5013A - Chris Livingston 1.48 1.61 1.39 1.43 1.24 1.2817B - Judge Angela B. Puckett 3.14 3.61 3.33 3.54 3.50 3.3821C - Jonathan Scott Dills 3.19 3.29 3.26 3.40 3.23 3.2322B - Jeffrey J. Berg 3.58 3.66 3.80 3.67 3.54 3.6022B - David S. Doherty 3.15 3.06 3.21 3.09 3.03 3.1122B - Lori Hamilton 4.12 4.19 4.07 4.14 4.15 4.1622B - Jon W. Welborn 3.57 3.11 3.43 3.30 3.30 3.27

Superior Court Candidate Categorical Averages

4


District and Candidate Integrity & Impartiality Legal Ability Professionalism Communication Administrative

SkillsOverall

Performance3A - Earl T. Brown* 4.28 4.04 4.38 4.21 4.00 4.223A - Daniel Hines Entzminger 4.32 3.97 4.34 4.05 4.06 4.123A - Wendy Hazelton 3.98 3.60 3.98 3.77 3.81 3.773A - Nancy S. Ray 4.68 4.63 4.64 4.18 4.44 4.443A - Jay Saunders 4.26 4.11 4.39 4.14 3.83 4.154 - Paul Castle 2.96 2.80 2.89 2.44 2.39 2.624 - Kelly Neal 4.04 3.95 4.11 3.93 3.91 4.044 - Anita R. Powers 3.72 3.56 3.70 3.51 3.44 3.584 - Michael C. Surles 3.67 3.31 3.80 3.64 3.35 3.464 - Nathan Sweet 3.96 3.80 4.04 4.17 3.70 3.864 - Mario White 4.32 4.18 4.35 4.30 4.15 4.355 - Richard “Ray” Kern 3.75 3.48 3.67 3.55 3.61 3.557 - Beth Freshwater-Smith 4.25 4.39 4.28 4.26 4.33 4.307 - Sharon Sprinkle 3.84 3.96 3.90 3.94 3.73 3.897 - Andrew J. Whitley 3.91 3.56 4.14 3.78 3.96 3.827 - Lamont Wiggins 3.79 3.67 3.88 3.73 3.54 3.678 - Curtis Stackhouse 4.71 4.56 4.76 4.68 4.67 4.678 - Judge Annette W. Turik 4.63 4.38 4.66 4.51 4.53 4.449 - S. Quon Bridges 3.70 3.45 3.68 3.67 3.50 3.539 - Caroline S. Burnette 4.13 4.25 4.06 4.12 4.27 4.109 - A. Chance Wilkinson 3.97 3.80 3.87 3.69 3.70 3.879A - John Hoyte (J.) Stultz III 4.41 4.32 4.44 4.48 4.27 4.449B - Judge Adam Keith 4.44 4.08 4.41 4.13 4.13 4.2910 - Bryant Paris III 4.39 4.23 4.41 4.19 4.30 4.2710 - Judge Jefferson G. Griffin 4.08 3.77 3.99 3.80 3.97 3.9210 - Marty E. Miller 3.90 3.62 3.88 3.76 3.57 3.6810 - Walter Rand 3.46 3.29 3.33 3.35 3.32 3.3511 - LeVonda G. Wood 2.86 2.48 2.90 2.83 2.76 2.5411 - Frank Wood 4.55 4.30 4.50 4.50 4.41 4.4512 - Sanya Eller 3.40 3.09 3.22 3.16 3.40 3.2012 - Mike Hardin 3.28 3.68 3.32 3.56 3.54 3.4312 - Clark Reaves 4.45 4.34 4.45 4.18 4.17 4.2912 - Tiffany Marie Whitfield 4.09 3.79 4.00 3.93 3.87 3.9213 - W. Richard Cox 4.02 3.63 4.08 3.92 3.64 3.8013 - Judge Jason C. Disbrow 4.72 4.66 4.79 4.77 4.63 4.7713 - C. Ashley Gore 4.26 3.79 4.29 4.21 3.97 4.0814 - Shamieka LaCher Rhinehart 4.39 4.21 4.28 4.31 4.26 4.3315B - Samantha Cabe 4.35 4.40 4.51 4.30 4.25 4.3615B - Sam Cooper 4.26 4.11 4.23 4.09 4.23 4.1915B - Sherri Murrell 4.55 4.37 4.47 4.50 4.34 4.4116A - Angela J. Carter 3.35 3.51 3.48 3.43 3.36 3.5616B - Timothy J. Peterkin 3.95 3.86 3.84 3.83 3.96 3.7818 - Ron Butler 4.29 3.89 4.25 3.99 3.75 4.0018 - Lora Christine Cubbage 3.22 3.03 3.29 3.26 3.11 3.0718 - Mark Cummings 2.87 2.94 2.98 3.18 2.93 2.8218 - Tonia A. Cutchin 3.84 3.69 3.87 3.70 3.54 3.7018 - Bill Davis 4.22 4.41 4.32 4.18 4.17 4.2218 - Judge Jon Kreider 4.09 3.99 4.17 4.08 3.98 4.0118 - Miranda Reynolds Reavis 3.50 3.09 3.33 3.46 3.15 3.2718 - Judge David Sherrill 4.48 4.26 4.59 4.28 4.29 4.3318 - John Stone 3.29 3.21 3.31 3.24 3.12 3.2418 - Marc Tyrey 4.58 4.58 4.66 4.64 4.68 4.5519B - Darren C. Allen 3.77 3.93 3.71 3.74 3.77 3.7821 - Aaron J. Berlin 4.20 4.05 4.21 4.00 4.09 4.1121 - Carrie F. Vickery 3.53 3.47 3.46 3.65 3.58 3.5424 - Judge Hal G. Harrison 4.47 4.16 4.48 4.24 4.41 4.3524 - Joshua J. (Josh) Teague 4.08 3.80 4.13 3.89 3.91 3.86

District Court Candidate Categorical Averages

5


District and Candidate Integrity & Impartiality Legal Ability Professionalism Communication Administrative

SkillsOverall

Performance

District Court Candidate Categorical Averages

26 - George Bell 3.76 3.63 3.91 3.88 3.88 3.6926 - Aretha Blake 4.06 3.89 4.17 3.97 3.96 3.9126 - James F. Cyrus IV 2.77 2.48 2.76 2.74 2.52 2.5626 - Faith Fickling 4.32 4.30 4.42 4.31 4.41 4.3426 - Paulina Havelka 3.83 3.36 3.76 3.63 3.49 3.5026 - Tracy H. Hewett 4.21 4.01 4.35 4.13 4.06 4.0726 - Ben S. Thalheimer 3.34 3.10 3.21 3.04 2.91 3.0927B - Justin K. Brackett 3.69 3.41 3.77 3.76 3.49 3.5030 - Kimberly N. Carpenter 3.82 3.57 3.85 3.69 3.56 3.70

*Candidate Earl T. Brown of Greenville died tragically in a car accident on Saturday, Feb. 20.

6


Quality Number of Responses Excellent Good Average Below Average Poor Average Rating

79 31 12 3 162.7% 24.6% 9.5% 2.4% 0.8%

66 46 14 0 251.56% 35.94% 10.94% 0.00% 1.56%

86 26 8 5 267.72% 20.47% 6.30% 3.94% 1.57%

76 31 16 2 160.32% 24.60% 12.70% 1.59% 0.79%

46 32 12 0 548.42% 33.68% 12.63% 0.00% 5.26%

69 28 17 2 158.97% 23.93% 14.53% 1.71% 0.85%


58 21 14 9 1250.9% 18.4% 12.3% 7.9% 10.5%

66 29 16 4 057.39% 25.22% 13.91% 3.48% 0.00%

66 20 13 10 657.39% 17.39% 11.30% 8.70% 5.22%

45 39 15 5 840.18% 34.82% 13.39% 4.46% 7.14%

45 21 15 3 351.72% 24.14% 17.24% 3.45% 3.45%

53 24 15 9 649.53% 22.43% 14.02% 8.41% 5.61%


75 24 4 2 270.1% 22.4% 3.7% 1.9% 1.9%

66 34 6 0 261.11% 31.48% 5.56% 0.00% 1.85%

79 20 7 0 273.15% 18.52% 6.48% 0.00% 1.85%

66 26 8 4 361.68% 24.30% 7.48% 3.74% 2.80%

57 23 4 2 264.77% 26.14% 4.55% 2.27% 2.27%

67 27 4 2 265.69% 26.47% 3.92% 1.96% 1.96%

Individual Superior Court Candidate Reports

Professionalism 108 4.61

Communication

Communication 112 3.96

8A - Imelda Pate

Integrity & Impartiality 114 3.91



3A - Jeff Foster


Legal Ability 128 4.36



Administrative Skills 95 4.20

Overall Performance 117 4.38

8A - Stuart L. Stroud





107 4.38



7




46 20 7 3 457.5% 25.0% 8.8% 3.8% 5.0%

36 30 12 0 245.00% 37.50% 15.00% 0.00% 2.50%

42 24 9 2 352.50% 30.00% 11.25% 2.50% 3.75%

37 27 10 2 247.44% 34.62% 12.82% 2.56% 2.56%

29 21 9 0 247.54% 34.43% 14.75% 0.00% 3.28%

33 30 9 0 344.00% 40.00% 12.00% 0.00% 4.00%


33 12 7 1 161.1% 22.2% 13.0% 1.9% 1.9%

25 15 9 3 246.30% 27.78% 16.67% 5.56% 3.70%

35 14 4 0 164.81% 25.93% 7.41% 0.00% 1.85%

15 15 12 5 628.30% 28.30% 22.64% 9.43% 11.32%

16 10 10 2 438.10% 23.81% 23.81% 4.76% 9.52%

18 16 10 3 336.00% 32.00% 20.00% 6.00% 6.00%


16 25 30 21 5111.2% 17.5% 21.0% 14.7% 35.7%

17 26 34 31 3611.81% 18.06% 23.61% 21.53% 25.00%

19 29 24 27 4613.10% 20.00% 16.55% 18.62% 31.72%

21 22 41 21 3515.00% 15.71% 29.29% 15.00% 25.00%

16 14 24 17 4214.16% 12.39% 21.24% 15.04% 37.17%

13 20 29 28 449.70% 14.93% 21.64% 20.90% 32.84%

8B - Jerry Braswell

Integrity & Impartiality 143


Professionalism



8B - Will Bland



8A - Dal Wooten






54 4.52




2.54




8




102 22 10 3 173.9% 15.9% 7.2% 2.2% 0.7%

92 33 7 3 366.67% 23.91% 5.07% 2.17% 2.17%

111 18 7 2 378.72% 12.77% 4.96% 1.42% 2.13%

88 35 9 3 264.23% 25.55% 6.57% 2.19% 1.46%

71 30 4 4 263.96% 27.03% 3.60% 3.60% 1.80%

91 25 7 6 269.47% 19.08% 5.34% 4.58% 1.53%


0 1 3 5 200.0% 3.4% 10.3% 17.2% 69.0%

0 0 5 9 170.00% 0.00% 16.13% 29.03% 54.84%

0 0 3 6 220.00% 0.00% 9.68% 19.35% 70.97%

0 0 2 9 190.00% 0.00% 6.67% 30.00% 63.33%

0 0 0 6 190.00% 0.00% 0.00% 24.00% 76.00%

0 0 0 8 210.00% 0.00% 0.00% 27.59% 72.41%


20 13 10 11 1628.6% 18.6% 14.3% 15.7% 22.9%

25 17 12 5 1036.23% 24.64% 17.39% 7.25% 14.49%

22 14 12 7 1431.88% 20.29% 17.39% 10.14% 20.29%

23 19 11 7 1032.86% 27.14% 15.71% 10.00% 14.29%

19 19 10 7 929.69% 29.69% 15.63% 10.94% 14.06%

17 19 12 6 1126.15% 29.23% 18.46% 9.23% 16.92%







10F - Judge A. Graham Shirley




13A - Chris Livingston



69 3.33



17B - Judge Angela B. Puckett



Professionalism



9




30 23 27 28 1624.2% 18.5% 21.8% 22.6% 12.9%

34 22 33 20 1726.98% 17.46% 26.19% 15.87% 13.49%

32 24 31 21 1725.60% 19.20% 24.80% 16.80% 13.60%

31 27 40 13 1325.00% 21.77% 32.26% 10.48% 10.48%

22 17 31 11 1423.16% 17.89% 32.63% 11.58% 14.74%

31 19 31 25 1425.83% 15.83% 25.83% 20.83% 11.67%


29 19 14 5 1336.3% 23.8% 17.5% 6.3% 16.3%

25 21 24 7 530.49% 25.61% 29.27% 8.54% 6.10%

32 21 15 6 739.51% 25.93% 18.52% 7.41% 8.64%

25 26 15 8 730.86% 32.10% 18.52% 9.88% 8.64%

20 18 11 4 1031.75% 28.57% 17.46% 6.35% 15.87%

25 17 19 6 833.33% 22.67% 25.33% 8.00% 10.67%


8 11 21 7 615.1% 20.8% 39.6% 13.2% 11.3%

6 10 25 7 611.11% 18.52% 46.30% 12.96% 11.11%

8 14 19 5 715.09% 26.42% 35.85% 9.43% 13.21%

6 14 20 7 711.11% 25.93% 37.04% 12.96% 12.96%

5 8 15 7 512.50% 20.00% 37.50% 17.50% 12.50%

7 12 21 6 713.21% 22.64% 39.62% 11.32% 13.21%


Communication


21C - Jonathan Scott Dills







22B - Jeffrey J. Berg




22B - David S. Doherty



81 3.67





10




53 21 15 4 653.5% 21.2% 15.2% 4.0% 6.1%

53 22 20 4 252.48% 21.78% 19.80% 3.96% 1.98%

55 18 15 6 754.46% 17.82% 14.85% 5.94% 6.93%

48 26 16 6 248.98% 26.53% 16.33% 6.12% 2.04%

42 18 14 5 251.85% 22.22% 17.28% 6.17% 2.47%

49 20 12 4 554.44% 22.22% 13.33% 4.44% 5.56%


18 13 17 9 330.0% 21.7% 28.3% 15.0% 5.0%

15 8 16 13 924.59% 13.11% 26.23% 21.31% 14.75%

18 10 18 10 529.51% 16.39% 29.51% 16.39% 8.20%

15 10 17 14 425.00% 16.67% 28.33% 23.33% 6.67%

13 7 17 8 526.00% 14.00% 34.00% 16.00% 10.00%

13 9 18 12 423.21% 16.07% 32.14% 21.43% 7.14%

22B - Jon W. Welborn

Integrity & Impartiality 60


Professionalism

22B - Lori Hamilton




101 4.07


56 3.27

3.57





Overall Performance

11


District 3A:

Quality Number of Responses Excellent Good Average Below Average Poor Average

Rating55 27 17 3 1

53.4% 26.2% 16.5% 2.9% 1.0%38 37 21 5 1

37.25% 36.27% 20.59% 4.90% 0.98%60 26 14 2 1

58.25% 25.24% 13.59% 1.94% 0.97%51 29 20 3 1

49.04% 27.88% 19.23% 2.88% 0.96%33 26 15 6 2

40.24% 31.71% 18.29% 7.32% 2.44%45 32 17 2 1

46.39% 32.99% 17.53% 2.06% 1.03%


Rating31 22 7 2 0

50.0% 35.5% 11.3% 3.2% 0.0%21 23 12 4 1

34.43% 37.70% 19.67% 6.56% 1.64%33 20 7 1 1

53.23% 32.26% 11.29% 1.61% 1.61%21 27 9 3 1

34.43% 44.26% 14.75% 4.92% 1.64%17 20 8 3 0

35.42% 41.67% 16.67% 6.25% 0.00%21 26 10 2 0

35.59% 44.07% 16.95% 3.39% 0.00%


Rating21 10 7 0 5

48.8% 23.3% 16.3% 0.0% 11.6%13 10 14 2 4

30.23% 23.26% 32.56% 4.65% 9.30%19 14 6 1 4

43.18% 31.82% 13.64% 2.27% 9.09%14 16 7 4 3

31.82% 36.36% 15.91% 9.09% 6.82%16 7 7 2 4

44.44% 19.44% 19.44% 5.56% 11.11%15 13 9 2 4

34.88% 30.23% 20.93% 4.65% 9.30%

Individual District Court Candidate Reports

3A - Earl T. Brown*







3A - Daniel Hines Entzminger






*Candidate Earl T. Brown of Greenville died tragically in a car accident on Saturday, Feb. 20.


3A - Wendy Hazelton







12



District 3A (continued):


Rating39 8 2 0 1

78.0% 16.0% 4.0% 0.0% 2.0%39 9 1 0 2

76.47% 17.65% 1.96% 0.00% 3.92%41 5 1 1 2

82.00% 10.00% 2.00% 2.00% 4.00%25 14 7 0 3

51.02% 28.57% 14.29% 0.00% 6.12%29 11 3 0 2

64.44% 24.44% 6.67% 0.00% 4.44%31 14 2 2 1

62.00% 28.00% 4.00% 4.00% 2.00%


Rating31 13 11 1 1

54.4% 22.8% 19.3% 1.8% 1.8%23 20 10 2 1

41.07% 35.71% 17.86% 3.57% 1.79%34 13 9 0 1

59.65% 22.81% 15.79% 0.00% 1.75%27 15 12 2 1

47.37% 26.32% 21.05% 3.51% 1.75%19 10 13 1 4

40.43% 21.28% 27.66% 2.13% 8.51%23 19 12 0 1

41.82% 34.55% 21.82% 0.00% 1.82%

3A - Nancy S. Ray







3A - Jay Saunders







13



District 4:


Rating7 13 12 9 10

13.7% 25.5% 23.5% 17.6% 19.6%6 11 16 10 12

10.91% 20.00% 29.09% 18.18% 21.82%6 17 8 15 10

10.71% 30.36% 14.29% 26.79% 17.86%4 6 12 21 12

7.27% 10.91% 21.82% 38.18% 21.82%4 2 7 10 10

12.12% 6.06% 21.21% 30.30% 30.30%4 6 18 11 11

8.00% 12.00% 36.00% 22.00% 22.00%


Rating26 15 8 2 4

47.3% 27.3% 14.5% 3.6% 7.3%22 20 7 3 4

39.29% 35.71% 12.50% 5.36% 7.14%28 15 7 3 3

50.00% 26.79% 12.50% 5.36% 5.36%26 11 11 5 3

46.43% 19.64% 19.64% 8.93% 5.36%20 15 4 4 4

42.55% 31.91% 8.51% 8.51% 8.51%26 12 5 5 3

50.98% 23.53% 9.80% 9.80% 5.88%


Rating16 20 10 3 5

29.6% 37.0% 18.5% 5.6% 9.3%13 16 14 5 4

25.00% 30.77% 26.92% 9.62% 7.69%15 20 12 2 5

27.78% 37.04% 22.22% 3.70% 9.26%14 15 16 5 5

25.45% 27.27% 29.09% 9.09% 9.09%10 10 19 2 4

22.22% 22.22% 42.22% 4.44% 8.89%11 18 17 2 4

21.15% 34.62% 32.69% 3.85% 7.69%

4 - Paul Castle







4 - Kelly Neal







4 - Anita R. Powers







14



District 4 (continued):


Rating14 13 9 2 5

32.6% 30.2% 20.9% 4.7% 11.6%5 15 14 4 4

11.90% 35.71% 33.33% 9.52% 9.52%14 17 9 1 4

31.11% 37.78% 20.00% 2.22% 8.89%11 20 6 3 5

24.44% 44.44% 13.33% 6.67% 11.11%6 10 8 3 4

19.35% 32.26% 25.81% 9.68% 12.90%7 16 11 3 4

17.07% 39.02% 26.83% 7.32% 9.76%


Rating21 14 3 4 4

45.7% 30.4% 6.5% 8.7% 8.7%16 14 10 3 3

34.78% 30.43% 21.74% 6.52% 6.52%21 15 3 5 2

45.65% 32.61% 6.52% 10.87% 4.35%20 18 5 2 1

43.48% 39.13% 10.87% 4.35% 2.17%11 14 6 2 4

29.73% 37.84% 16.22% 5.41% 10.81%15 16 4 4 3

35.71% 38.10% 9.52% 9.52% 7.14%


Rating30 25 5 1 1

48.4% 40.3% 8.1% 1.6% 1.6%25 23 11 0 1

41.67% 38.33% 18.33% 0.00% 1.67%30 23 6 0 1

50.00% 38.33% 10.00% 0.00% 1.67%30 22 6 0 2

50.00% 36.67% 10.00% 0.00% 3.33%21 17 5 3 1

44.68% 36.17% 10.64% 6.38% 2.13%30 19 7 0 1

52.63% 33.33% 12.28% 0.00% 1.75%

4 - Michael C. Surles







4 - Nathan Sweet







4 - Mario White







15



District 5:


Rating7 4 7 1 1

35.0% 20.0% 35.0% 5.0% 5.0%5 5 7 3 1

23.81% 23.81% 33.33% 14.29% 4.76%6 6 6 2 1

28.57% 28.57% 28.57% 9.52% 4.76%7 4 4 3 2

35.00% 20.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00%6 4 4 3 1

33.33% 22.22% 22.22% 16.67% 5.56%5 6 5 3 1

25.00% 30.00% 25.00% 15.00% 5.00%

5 - Richard “Ray” Kern







16



District 7:


Rating54 20 9 5 4

58.7% 21.7% 9.8% 5.4% 4.3%56 24 9 5 0

59.57% 25.53% 9.57% 5.32% 0.00%59 19 7 5 5

62.11% 20.00% 7.37% 5.26% 5.26%54 21 12 7 1

56.84% 22.11% 12.63% 7.37% 1.05%48 11 12 4 1

63.16% 14.47% 15.79% 5.26% 1.32%53 22 11 4 2

57.61% 23.91% 11.96% 4.35% 2.17%


Rating28 15 13 7 4

41.8% 22.4% 19.4% 10.4% 6.0%25 19 20 1 2

37.31% 28.36% 29.85% 1.49% 2.99%28 20 12 4 5

40.58% 28.99% 17.39% 5.80% 7.25%28 16 17 3 3

41.79% 23.88% 25.37% 4.48% 4.48%19 14 15 5 3

33.93% 25.00% 26.79% 8.93% 5.36%24 19 14 4 3

37.50% 29.69% 21.88% 6.25% 4.69%


Rating22 14 14 2 3

40.0% 25.5% 25.5% 3.6% 5.5%17 11 16 5 5

31.48% 20.37% 29.63% 9.26% 9.26%26 15 13 1 1

46.43% 26.79% 23.21% 1.79% 1.79%20 11 18 1 4

37.04% 20.37% 33.33% 1.85% 7.41%24 12 10 2 4

46.15% 23.08% 19.23% 3.85% 7.69%18 16 16 3 2

32.73% 29.09% 29.09% 5.45% 3.64%

7 - Beth Freshwater-Smith







7 - Sharon Sprinkle







7 - Andrew J. Whitley







17





Rating27 17 18 6 4

37.5% 23.6% 25.0% 8.3% 5.6%22 19 20 7 4

30.56% 26.39% 27.78% 9.72% 5.56%30 17 19 4 4

40.54% 22.97% 25.68% 5.41% 5.41%26 19 15 8 5

35.62% 26.03% 20.55% 10.96% 6.85%18 16 14 7 6

29.51% 26.23% 22.95% 11.48% 9.84%18 22 22 5 3

25.71% 31.43% 31.43% 7.14% 4.29%

7 - Lamont Wiggins







18



District 8:


Rating46 8 3 1 0

79.3% 13.8% 5.2% 1.7% 0.0%37 15 5 0 0

64.91% 26.32% 8.77% 0.00% 0.00%47 8 3 0 0

81.03% 13.79% 5.17% 0.00% 0.00%42 10 4 0 0

75.00% 17.86% 7.14% 0.00% 0.00%33 9 3 0 0

73.33% 20.00% 6.67% 0.00% 0.00%37 13 2 0 0

71.15% 25.00% 3.85% 0.00% 0.00%


Rating50 7 5 1 1

78.1% 10.9% 7.8% 1.6% 1.6%38 15 7 2 1

60.32% 23.81% 11.11% 3.17% 1.59%51 9 3 1 1

78.46% 13.85% 4.62% 1.54% 1.54%44 15 3 1 2

67.69% 23.08% 4.62% 1.54% 3.08%40 12 4 1 1

68.97% 20.69% 6.90% 1.72% 1.72%40 13 5 1 2

65.57% 21.31% 8.20% 1.64% 3.28%

8 - Curtis Stackhouse







8 - Judge Annette W. Turik







19



District 9:


Rating47 22 19 8 15

42.3% 19.8% 17.1% 7.2% 13.5%38 24 18 12 19

34.23% 21.62% 16.22% 10.81% 17.12%48 20 16 13 14

43.24% 18.02% 14.41% 11.71% 12.61%41 27 18 13 11

37.27% 24.55% 16.36% 11.82% 10.00%34 24 12 13 15

34.69% 24.49% 12.24% 13.27% 15.31%37 22 16 12 15

36.27% 21.57% 15.69% 11.76% 14.71%


Rating35 15 10 5 2

52.2% 22.4% 14.9% 7.5% 3.0%37 19 8 3 2

53.62% 27.54% 11.59% 4.35% 2.90%35 17 6 5 5

51.47% 25.00% 8.82% 7.35% 7.35%32 19 9 3 3

48.48% 28.79% 13.64% 4.55% 4.55%33 16 6 4 1

55.00% 26.67% 10.00% 6.67% 1.67%32 16 7 5 3

50.79% 25.40% 11.11% 7.94% 4.76%


Rating26 21 12 5 2

39.4% 31.8% 18.2% 7.6% 3.0%18 24 18 5 1

27.27% 36.36% 27.27% 7.58% 1.52%23 22 17 3 3

33.82% 32.35% 25.00% 4.41% 4.41%18 22 15 4 5

28.13% 34.38% 23.44% 6.25% 7.81%15 17 17 6 1

26.79% 30.36% 30.36% 10.71% 1.79%18 22 16 5 0

29.51% 36.07% 26.23% 8.20% 0.00%

9 - S. Quon Bridges







9 - Caroline S. Burnette







9 - A. Chance Wilkinson







20





Rating22 9 0 1 2

64.7% 26.5% 0.0% 2.9% 5.9%19 11 2 0 2

55.88% 32.35% 5.88% 0.00% 5.88%22 9 1 0 2

64.71% 26.47% 2.94% 0.00% 5.88%22 8 1 1 1

66.67% 24.24% 3.03% 3.03% 3.03%17 11 3 1 1

51.52% 33.33% 9.09% 3.03% 3.03%20 9 1 1 1

62.50% 28.13% 3.13% 3.13% 3.13%


Rating21 12 2 0 1

58.3% 33.3% 5.6% 0.0% 2.8%15 16 6 0 2

38.46% 41.03% 15.38% 0.00% 5.13%22 13 3 0 1

56.41% 33.33% 7.69% 0.00% 2.56%14 18 6 0 1

35.90% 46.15% 15.38% 0.00% 2.56%11 15 4 0 1

35.48% 48.39% 12.90% 0.00% 3.23%16 15 3 0 1

45.71% 42.86% 8.57% 0.00% 2.86%

9A - John Hoyte (J.) Stultz III







9B - Judge Adam Keith







21



District 10:


Rating52 17 12 2 1

61.9% 20.2% 14.3% 2.4% 1.2%47 19 16 1 3

54.65% 22.09% 18.60% 1.16% 3.49%58 16 12 3 1

64.44% 17.78% 13.33% 3.33% 1.11%43 22 15 3 2

50.59% 25.88% 17.65% 3.53% 2.35%43 15 12 3 1

58.11% 20.27% 16.22% 4.05% 1.35%46 20 15 1 2

54.76% 23.81% 17.86% 1.19% 2.38%


Rating85 36 29 11 7

50.6% 21.4% 17.3% 6.5% 4.2%58 49 33 20 8

34.52% 29.17% 19.64% 11.90% 4.76%75 46 25 14 8

44.64% 27.38% 14.88% 8.33% 4.76%67 42 29 19 11

39.88% 25.00% 17.26% 11.31% 6.55%66 35 25 9 9

45.83% 24.31% 17.36% 6.25% 6.25%65 43 28 13 8

41.40% 27.39% 17.83% 8.28% 5.10%


Rating23 28 14 5 2

31.9% 38.9% 19.4% 6.9% 2.8%20 20 22 7 4

27.40% 27.40% 30.14% 9.59% 5.48%25 25 15 8 1

33.78% 33.78% 20.27% 10.81% 1.35%20 28 16 8 2

27.03% 37.84% 21.62% 10.81% 2.70%16 13 15 11 1

28.57% 23.21% 26.79% 19.64% 1.79%18 22 19 9 1

26.09% 31.88% 27.54% 13.04% 1.45%

10 - Bryant Paris III







10 - Judge Jefferson G. Griffin







10 - Marty E. Miller







22





Rating46 26 26 13 22

34.6% 19.5% 19.5% 9.8% 16.5%44 23 23 16 28

32.84% 17.16% 17.16% 11.94% 20.90%44 24 27 12 28

32.59% 17.78% 20.00% 8.89% 20.74%40 27 24 17 22

30.77% 20.77% 18.46% 13.08% 16.92%34 24 18 11 23

30.91% 21.82% 16.36% 10.00% 20.91%38 27 20 14 23

31.15% 22.13% 16.39% 11.48% 18.85%

10 - Walter Rand







23



District 11:


Rating17 15 14 8 26

21.3% 18.8% 17.5% 10.0% 32.5%9 12 19 13 30

10.84% 14.46% 22.89% 15.66% 36.14%19 13 14 13 23

23.17% 15.85% 17.07% 15.85% 28.05%17 11 16 10 24

21.79% 14.10% 20.51% 12.82% 30.77%11 14 11 8 22

16.67% 21.21% 16.67% 12.12% 33.33%14 8 15 13 30

17.50% 10.00% 18.75% 16.25% 37.50%


Rating42 20 3 0 1

63.6% 30.3% 4.5% 0.0% 1.5%32 25 7 1 1

48.48% 37.88% 10.61% 1.52% 1.52%42 20 5 0 1

61.76% 29.41% 7.35% 0.00% 1.47%39 23 3 0 1

59.09% 34.85% 4.55% 0.00% 1.52%28 15 5 0 1

57.14% 30.61% 10.20% 0.00% 2.04%33 26 2 0 1

53.23% 41.94% 3.23% 0.00% 1.61%

11 - LeVonda G. Wood







11 - Frank Wood







24



District 12:


Rating14 21 16 5 9

21.5% 32.3% 24.6% 7.7% 13.8%12 13 23 9 11

17.65% 19.12% 33.82% 13.24% 16.18%12 20 16 9 10

17.91% 29.85% 23.88% 13.43% 14.93%15 14 16 11 11

22.39% 20.90% 23.88% 16.42% 16.42%15 16 19 5 8

23.81% 25.40% 30.16% 7.94% 12.70%13 13 21 8 9

20.31% 20.31% 32.81% 12.50% 14.06%


Rating35 23 15 10 26

32.1% 21.1% 13.8% 9.2% 23.9%43 19 26 6 13

40.19% 17.76% 24.30% 5.61% 12.15%35 20 19 13 21

32.41% 18.52% 17.59% 12.04% 19.44%38 20 24 6 16

36.54% 19.23% 23.08% 5.77% 15.38%34 21 19 7 15

35.42% 21.88% 19.79% 7.29% 15.63%35 20 17 11 18

34.65% 19.80% 16.83% 10.89% 17.82%


Rating66 23 7 1 4

65.3% 22.8% 6.9% 1.0% 4.0%59 25 10 3 3

59.00% 25.00% 10.00% 3.00% 3.00%66 20 6 2 4

67.35% 20.41% 6.12% 2.04% 4.08%50 26 13 4 4

51.55% 26.80% 13.40% 4.12% 4.12%44 25 14 3 3

49.44% 28.09% 15.73% 3.37% 3.37%54 20 10 3 4

59.34% 21.98% 10.99% 3.30% 4.40%

12 - Sanya Eller







12 - Mike Hardin







12 - Clark Reaves







25





Rating40 17 11 2 6

52.6% 22.4% 14.5% 2.6% 7.9%30 17 21 2 7

38.96% 22.08% 27.27% 2.60% 9.09%35 19 14 3 5

46.05% 25.00% 18.42% 3.95% 6.58%35 15 15 5 5

46.67% 20.00% 20.00% 6.67% 6.67%29 14 18 4 4

42.03% 20.29% 26.09% 5.80% 5.80%32 20 12 4 6

43.24% 27.03% 16.22% 5.41% 8.11%

12 - Tiffany Marie Whitfield







26



District 13:


Rating30 7 5 3 6

58.8% 13.7% 9.8% 5.9% 11.8%22 9 8 3 9

43.14% 17.65% 15.69% 5.88% 17.65%30 8 6 1 6

58.82% 15.69% 11.76% 1.96% 11.76%25 12 5 3 6

49.02% 23.53% 9.80% 5.88% 11.76%20 5 6 4 7

47.62% 11.90% 14.29% 9.52% 16.67%22 9 5 4 6

47.83% 19.57% 10.87% 8.70% 13.04%


Rating63 15 4 0 0

76.8% 18.3% 4.9% 0.0% 0.0%61 19 1 1 1

73.49% 22.89% 1.20% 1.20% 1.20%68 12 1 1 0

82.93% 14.63% 1.22% 1.22% 0.00%67 13 3 0 0

80.72% 15.66% 3.61% 0.00% 0.00%55 15 3 1 1

73.33% 20.00% 4.00% 1.33% 1.33%63 12 3 0 0

80.77% 15.38% 3.85% 0.00% 0.00%


Rating39 15 7 0 5

59.1% 22.7% 10.6% 0.0% 7.6%25 17 13 7 4

37.88% 25.76% 19.70% 10.61% 6.06%38 18 5 1 4

57.58% 27.27% 7.58% 1.52% 6.06%38 14 8 2 4

57.58% 21.21% 12.12% 3.03% 6.06%28 14 9 3 5

47.46% 23.73% 15.25% 5.08% 8.47%29 15 12 0 4

48.33% 25.00% 20.00% 0.00% 6.67%

13 - W. Richard Cox







13 - Judge Jason C. Disbrow







13 - C. Ashley Gore







27



District 14:


Rating103 24 13 6 6

67.8% 15.8% 8.6% 3.9% 3.9%80 43 13 7 7

53.33% 28.67% 8.67% 4.67% 4.67%90 35 13 5 8

59.60% 23.18% 8.61% 3.31% 5.30%88 36 10 7 6

59.86% 24.49% 6.80% 4.76% 4.08%81 21 10 10 6

63.28% 16.41% 7.81% 7.81% 4.69%86 32 10 6 6

61.43% 22.86% 7.14% 4.29% 4.29%

14 - Shamieka LaCher Rhinehart







28



District 15B:


Rating41 17 12 2 0

56.9% 23.6% 16.7% 2.8% 0.0%42 19 9 2 0

58.33% 26.39% 12.50% 2.78% 0.00%49 13 10 1 0

67.12% 17.81% 13.70% 1.37% 0.00%35 23 12 1 0

49.30% 32.39% 16.90% 1.41% 0.00%28 18 8 3 0

49.12% 31.58% 14.04% 5.26% 0.00%38 19 11 1 0

55.07% 27.54% 15.94% 1.45% 0.00%


Rating37 16 12 2 1

54.4% 23.5% 17.6% 2.9% 1.5%27 22 15 1 1

40.91% 33.33% 22.73% 1.52% 1.52%37 13 12 2 2

56.06% 19.70% 18.18% 3.03% 3.03%26 22 13 2 1

40.63% 34.38% 20.31% 3.13% 1.56%31 17 10 2 1

50.82% 27.87% 16.39% 3.28% 1.64%28 22 9 2 1

45.16% 35.48% 14.52% 3.23% 1.61%


Rating43 10 5 1 1

71.7% 16.7% 8.3% 1.7% 1.7%37 14 5 2 2

61.67% 23.33% 8.33% 3.33% 3.33%40 12 5 2 1

66.67% 20.00% 8.33% 3.33% 1.67%41 9 5 2 1

70.69% 15.52% 8.62% 3.45% 1.72%29 10 5 1 2

61.70% 21.28% 10.64% 2.13% 4.26%37 10 6 1 2

66.07% 17.86% 10.71% 1.79% 3.57%

15B - Samantha Cabe







15B - Sam Cooper







15B - Sherri Murrell







29



District 16A:


Rating14 10 5 5 9

32.6% 23.3% 11.6% 11.6% 20.9%14 10 10 2 7

32.56% 23.26% 23.26% 4.65% 16.28%16 7 8 3 8

38.10% 16.67% 19.05% 7.14% 19.05%13 10 8 4 7

30.95% 23.81% 19.05% 9.52% 16.67%11 7 5 3 7

33.33% 21.21% 15.15% 9.09% 21.21%14 9 7 3 6

35.90% 23.08% 17.95% 7.69% 15.38%


Rating53 14 9 8 11

55.8% 14.7% 9.5% 8.4% 11.6%49 17 11 11 10

50.00% 17.35% 11.22% 11.22% 10.20%53 14 13 10 12

51.96% 13.73% 12.75% 9.80% 11.76%48 18 13 11 10

48.00% 18.00% 13.00% 11.00% 10.00%46 13 7 9 8

55.42% 15.66% 8.43% 10.84% 9.64%45 15 13 8 12

48.39% 16.13% 13.98% 8.60% 12.90%

16A - Angela J. Carter







16B - Timothy J. Peterkin







30



District 18:


Rating64 42 14 1 4

51.2% 33.6% 11.2% 0.8% 3.2%39 50 24 4 7

31.45% 40.32% 19.35% 3.23% 5.65%65 39 15 2 5

51.59% 30.95% 11.90% 1.59% 3.97%46 44 24 4 5

37.40% 35.77% 19.51% 3.25% 4.07%25 31 27 3 5

27.47% 34.07% 29.67% 3.30% 5.49%45 48 19 4 6

36.89% 39.34% 15.57% 3.28% 4.92%


Rating28 20 16 14 20

28.6% 20.4% 16.3% 14.3% 20.4%19 24 22 11 24

19.00% 24.00% 22.00% 11.00% 24.00%28 25 20 4 24

27.72% 24.75% 19.80% 3.96% 23.76%22 26 24 10 17

22.22% 26.26% 24.24% 10.10% 17.17%16 14 20 8 15

21.92% 19.18% 27.40% 10.96% 20.55%22 18 22 15 20

22.68% 18.56% 22.68% 15.46% 20.62%


Rating27 20 23 24 33

21.3% 15.7% 18.1% 18.9% 26.0%27 22 23 26 29

21.26% 17.32% 18.11% 20.47% 22.83%29 22 25 21 31

22.66% 17.19% 19.53% 16.41% 24.22%26 30 32 14 23

20.80% 24.00% 25.60% 11.20% 18.40%20 14 22 19 21

20.83% 14.58% 22.92% 19.79% 21.88%22 20 24 30 28

17.74% 16.13% 19.35% 24.19% 22.58%

18 - Ron Butler







18 - Lora Christine Cubbage







18 - Mark Cummings







31





Rating51 27 21 8 11

43.2% 22.9% 17.8% 6.8% 9.3%42 27 32 10 9

35.00% 22.50% 26.67% 8.33% 7.50%56 23 21 12 9

46.28% 19.01% 17.36% 9.92% 7.44%45 24 26 9 12

38.79% 20.69% 22.41% 7.76% 10.34%35 18 23 14 10

35.00% 18.00% 23.00% 14.00% 10.00%44 26 28 11 10

36.97% 21.85% 23.53% 9.24% 8.40%


Rating94 27 12 11 9

61.4% 17.6% 7.8% 7.2% 5.9%102 33 8 6 6

65.81% 21.29% 5.16% 3.87% 3.87%99 31 9 8 8

63.87% 20.00% 5.81% 5.16% 5.16%80 43 15 4 10

52.63% 28.29% 9.87% 2.63% 6.58%65 37 14 3 8

51.18% 29.13% 11.02% 2.36% 6.30%87 35 16 5 9

57.24% 23.03% 10.53% 3.29% 5.92%


Rating72 29 23 5 9

52.2% 21.0% 16.7% 3.6% 6.5%64 29 31 7 7

46.38% 21.01% 22.46% 5.07% 5.07%77 29 16 7 8

56.20% 21.17% 11.68% 5.11% 5.84%65 37 21 6 7

47.79% 27.21% 15.44% 4.41% 5.15%55 26 22 7 7

47.01% 22.22% 18.80% 5.98% 5.98%65 31 25 6 9

47.79% 22.79% 18.38% 4.41% 6.62%

18 - Tonia A. Cutchin







18 - Bill Davis







18 - Judge Jon Kreider







32





Rating39 27 23 9 19

33.3% 23.1% 19.7% 7.7% 16.2%25 21 30 19 21

21.55% 18.10% 25.86% 16.38% 18.10%37 21 27 10 23

31.36% 17.80% 22.88% 8.47% 19.49%35 26 26 15 14

30.17% 22.41% 22.41% 12.93% 12.07%22 17 26 11 18

23.40% 18.09% 27.66% 11.70% 19.15%30 21 29 15 18

26.55% 18.58% 25.66% 13.27% 15.93%


Rating87 27 14 2 2

65.9% 20.5% 10.6% 1.5% 1.5%65 45 18 3 2

48.87% 33.83% 13.53% 2.26% 1.50%93 31 6 1 2

69.92% 23.31% 4.51% 0.75% 1.50%66 40 21 1 2

50.77% 30.77% 16.15% 0.77% 1.54%64 33 15 3 3

54.24% 27.97% 12.71% 2.54% 2.54%68 47 14 2 2

51.13% 35.34% 10.53% 1.50% 1.50%


Rating35 12 23 14 19

34.0% 11.7% 22.3% 13.6% 18.4%22 21 32 10 17

21.57% 20.59% 31.37% 9.80% 16.67%29 23 21 11 19

28.16% 22.33% 20.39% 10.68% 18.45%24 25 22 11 19

23.76% 24.75% 21.78% 10.89% 18.81%22 16 24 9 20

24.18% 17.58% 26.37% 9.89% 21.98%24 25 20 15 17

23.76% 24.75% 19.80% 14.85% 16.83%

18 - Miranda Reynolds Reavis







18 - Judge David Sherrill







18 - John Stone







33





Rating93 25 4 3 3

72.7% 19.5% 3.1% 2.3% 2.3%90 31 1 3 3

70.31% 24.22% 0.78% 2.34% 2.34%96 25 2 2 2

75.59% 19.69% 1.57% 1.57% 1.57%93 25 1 2 3

75.00% 20.16% 0.81% 1.61% 2.42%80 19 3 3 0

76.19% 18.10% 2.86% 2.86% 0.00%90 28 2 3 4

70.87% 22.05% 1.57% 2.36% 3.15%

18 - Marc Tyrey







34



District 19B:


Rating17 16 4 6 4

36.2% 34.0% 8.5% 12.8% 8.5%22 9 8 4 3

47.83% 19.57% 17.39% 8.70% 6.52%17 12 10 6 3

35.42% 25.00% 20.83% 12.50% 6.25%17 14 8 3 5

36.17% 29.79% 17.02% 6.38% 10.64%17 12 8 2 5

38.64% 27.27% 18.18% 4.55% 11.36%17 11 11 2 4

37.78% 24.44% 24.44% 4.44% 8.89%

19B - Darren C. Allen







35



District 21:


Rating98 38 19 9 9

56.6% 22.0% 11.0% 5.2% 5.2%86 36 34 7 10

49.71% 20.81% 19.65% 4.05% 5.78%98 38 23 4 10

56.65% 21.97% 13.29% 2.31% 5.78%78 46 26 8 12

45.88% 27.06% 15.29% 4.71% 7.06%79 34 17 9 10

53.02% 22.82% 11.41% 6.04% 6.71%84 44 20 11 8

50.30% 26.35% 11.98% 6.59% 4.79%


Rating55 39 28 20 21

33.7% 23.9% 17.2% 12.3% 12.9%43 47 34 22 17

26.38% 28.83% 20.86% 13.50% 10.43%54 33 35 21 22

32.73% 20.00% 21.21% 12.73% 13.33%52 49 29 16 16

32.10% 30.25% 17.90% 9.88% 9.88%44 29 24 12 16

35.20% 23.20% 19.20% 9.60% 12.80%50 38 32 19 17

32.05% 24.36% 20.51% 12.18% 10.90%

21 - Aaron J. Berlin







21 - Carrie F. Vickery







36



District 24:


Rating48 10 6 2 2

70.6% 14.7% 8.8% 2.9% 2.9%36 16 7 6 2

53.73% 23.88% 10.45% 8.96% 2.99%46 9 8 3 0

69.70% 13.64% 12.12% 4.55% 0.00%34 18 11 2 1

51.52% 27.27% 16.67% 3.03% 1.52%36 15 4 1 2

62.07% 25.86% 6.90% 1.72% 3.45%37 18 6 4 0

56.92% 27.69% 9.23% 6.15% 0.00%


Rating29 9 9 2 4

54.7% 17.0% 17.0% 3.8% 7.5%18 16 14 3 3

33.33% 29.63% 25.93% 5.56% 5.56%28 11 10 1 3

52.83% 20.75% 18.87% 1.89% 5.66%22 14 11 1 5

41.51% 26.42% 20.75% 1.89% 9.43%19 12 7 2 4

43.18% 27.27% 15.91% 4.55% 9.09%18 15 10 3 3

36.73% 30.61% 20.41% 6.12% 6.12%

24 - Judge Hal G. Harrison







24 - Joshua J. (Josh) Teague







37



District 26:


Rating53 35 16 12 15

40.5% 26.7% 12.2% 9.2% 11.5%41 35 34 13 10

30.83% 26.32% 25.56% 9.77% 7.52%63 32 16 7 15

47.37% 24.06% 12.03% 5.26% 11.28%53 36 25 5 11

40.77% 27.69% 19.23% 3.85% 8.46%39 30 19 7 6

38.61% 29.70% 18.81% 6.93% 5.94%44 32 25 14 10

35.20% 25.60% 20.00% 11.20% 8.00%


Rating59 31 17 7 7

48.8% 25.6% 14.0% 5.8% 5.8%54 29 16 12 9

45.00% 24.17% 13.33% 10.00% 7.50%68 27 15 7 6

55.28% 21.95% 12.20% 5.69% 4.88%53 31 24 6 7

43.80% 25.62% 19.83% 4.96% 5.79%42 26 18 8 4

42.86% 26.53% 18.37% 8.16% 4.08%50 31 20 8 8

42.74% 26.50% 17.09% 6.84% 6.84%


Rating16 19 15 22 26

16.3% 19.4% 15.3% 22.4% 26.5%12 11 25 16 35

12.12% 11.11% 25.25% 16.16% 35.35%16 18 20 20 27

15.84% 17.82% 19.80% 19.80% 26.73%18 14 18 17 29

18.75% 14.58% 18.75% 17.71% 30.21%11 9 18 10 29

14.29% 11.69% 23.38% 12.99% 37.66%14 12 20 22 31

14.14% 12.12% 20.20% 22.22% 31.31%

26 - George Bell







26 - Aretha Blake







26 - James F. Cyrus IV







38





Rating77 20 8 5 7

65.8% 17.1% 6.8% 4.3% 6.0%69 28 7 6 5

60.00% 24.35% 6.09% 5.22% 4.35%83 17 11 5 4

69.17% 14.17% 9.17% 4.17% 3.33%71 28 9 5 5

60.17% 23.73% 7.63% 4.24% 4.24%63 24 7 3 3

63.00% 24.00% 7.00% 3.00% 3.00%71 24 9 7 3

62.28% 21.05% 7.89% 6.14% 2.63%


Rating55 44 41 8 8

35.3% 28.2% 26.3% 5.1% 5.1%29 45 53 20 13

18.13% 28.13% 33.13% 12.50% 8.13%48 52 37 14 7

30.38% 32.91% 23.42% 8.86% 4.43%37 55 45 10 10

23.57% 35.03% 28.66% 6.37% 6.37%26 37 32 15 8

22.03% 31.36% 27.12% 12.71% 6.78%31 49 48 16 9

20.26% 32.03% 31.37% 10.46% 5.88%


Rating90 38 12 9 9

57.0% 24.1% 7.6% 5.7% 5.7%71 46 21 12 8

44.94% 29.11% 13.29% 7.59% 5.06%98 35 17 5 5

61.25% 21.88% 10.63% 3.13% 3.13%79 45 18 11 6

49.69% 28.30% 11.32% 6.92% 3.77%62 43 16 7 8

45.59% 31.62% 11.76% 5.15% 5.88%72 43 20 12 6

47.06% 28.10% 13.07% 7.84% 3.92%

26 - Faith Fickling







26 - Paulina Havelka







26 - Tracy H. Hewett







39





Rating49 47 47 22 29

25.3% 24.2% 24.2% 11.3% 14.9%34 47 49 30 33

17.62% 24.35% 25.39% 15.54% 17.10%45 47 43 24 36

23.08% 24.10% 22.05% 12.31% 18.46%31 45 47 38 31

16.15% 23.44% 24.48% 19.79% 16.15%22 40 36 28 35

13.66% 24.84% 22.36% 17.39% 21.74%36 46 39 33 34

19.15% 24.47% 20.74% 17.55% 18.09%

26 - Ben S. Thalheimer







40



District 27B:


Rating20 8 11 6 4

40.8% 16.3% 22.4% 12.2% 8.2%13 12 12 6 6

26.53% 24.49% 24.49% 12.24% 12.24%19 10 10 4 4

40.43% 21.28% 21.28% 8.51% 8.51%19 10 9 3 5

41.30% 21.74% 19.57% 6.52% 10.87%13 8 7 2 7

35.14% 21.62% 18.92% 5.41% 18.92%14 11 11 4 6

30.43% 23.91% 23.91% 8.70% 13.04%

27B - Justin K. Brackett







41



District 30:


Rating27 9 9 2 8

49.1% 16.4% 16.4% 3.6% 14.5%18 12 11 6 6

33.96% 22.64% 20.75% 11.32% 11.32%22 12 13 1 5

41.51% 22.64% 24.53% 1.89% 9.43%20 11 9 6 5

39.22% 21.57% 17.65% 11.76% 9.80%15 9 10 3 6

34.88% 20.93% 23.26% 6.98% 13.95%21 8 11 5 5

42.00% 16.00% 22.00% 10.00% 10.00%Overall Performance 50 3.70

30 - Kimberly N. Carpenter






42

Documents

SURVEY RESULTS - North Carolina Bar Association · This report contains survey results for ... or endorsement of any candidate. 1. ... not know” for the quality or qualities that