Manglona ‘good’; Camacho ‘acceptable’; Bogdan ‘deficient’

John A. Manglona, Joseph N. Camacho and Wesley M. Bogdan

CNMI Supreme Court Associate Justice John A. Manglona got a “good” total average rating, while Superior Court Associate Judge Joseph N. Camacho obtained an “acceptable” rating, while Superior Court Associate Judge Wesley M. Bogdan received a “deficient” rating in the NMI Bar Association’s evaluation of their performances on the bench.

Manglona, Camacho, and Bogdan are seeking retention on the bench this Nov. 8 general elections.

According to the NMI Bar Association’s results of the performance evaluation released over the weekend by the association’s president, Charity Hodson, Manglona obtained a high overall average rating of 4.54, while Camacho got 3.39, and Bogdan 2.66.

“Good” or a total average of 4 means the magistrate often exceeds minimum standards of performance.

“Acceptable” or a total average of 3 means the magistrate meets minimum standards of performance.

“Deficient” or a total average of 2 means the magistrate does not always meet minimum standards of performance.

“Excellent” or a total average of 5 means the magistrate consistently exceeds minimum standards of performance.

“Unacceptable” or a total average of 1 means the magistrate seldom meets minimum standards of performance.

Hodson said the evaluation rated the magistrates based on experience; integrity; professional competence; judicial temperament; service to law and contribution to the effective administration of justice; preparation; attentiveness; control over judicial proceedings; judicial management skills; courtesy to litigants, counsel, and court personnel; public disciplinary sanctions; and quality of opinions.

Manglona’s highest rating was 4.8 for public disciplinary sanctions; his lowest was 4.2 for quality of judicial opinions.

In October 2014, Manglona also got a “good” overall average rating.

This Nov. 8 is Manglona’s third time to go through a retention election. At the November 2007 election, voters overwhelmingly voted for Manglona’s retention as associate justice. At the November 2014 election, voters also overwhelmingly retained Manglona as associate justice. His term expires in May 2024.

Manglona and his wife, U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona, were the first to obtain an impressive “good” overall average rating among the magistrates who underwent performance evaluation by the NMI Bar Association. The couple first obtained the “good” rating during the performance evaluation in 2007.

Camacho’s highest rating was 3.7 for experience and attentiveness; his lowest was 3.0 for quality of judicial opinions.

In October 2014, Camacho also received an “acceptable” total average rating. At the November 2016 election, Camacho received an overwhelming number of votes for his retention on the bench. This Nov. 8 will be Camacho’s second retention election. His term will expire in November 2023.

Bogdan’s highest rating was 3.1 for integrity and attentiveness; his lowest was 2.2 for service to the law and contribution to the effective administration of justice.

Bogdan is the first magistrate to receive a “deficient” total average rating.

It is Bogdan’s first time to undergo retention election. His term will expire in November 2023.

A judge’s term is six years, while it’s an eight-year term for a justice.

Under a constitutional amendment, the question of whether justices or judges will be retained shall be put to a vote at a general election immediately before the end of that justice’s or judge’s initial term of office.

Hodson said the evaluation was conducted according to the association’s “resolution to establish and implement a procedure for evaluation of judicial nominees and candidates for judicial retention.”

Hodson said there are currently approximately 165 active attorneys in the NMI Bar Association, with approximately 95 attorneys with active stats on-island.

She said the survey period closed on Sept. 30, 2022, with 28 surveys submitted for Manglona, 27 for Camacho, and 32 for Bogdan.

Hodson said these evaluations are intended to provide information to the people of the Commonwealth in order to assist them in making reasoned decisions about whether to retain candidates for judicial office during general elections, as it is in the interest of the people of the Commonwealth to have judicial officers of the highest caliber.