1
8
9
4
5
6
7
Q
9
10
11
16
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21

Our proposal means, however,, that the judges
should not consider theaselves completely detached from
the general public. Clearly appellate court functions
differ fro» trial courts. On the appellate level inter-
pretation of the law is the essential point of dispute.
Naturally the public may well be concerned with the out-
come. Indeed reporting of cases decided at this level
tends 10 be more complete than ftt the trial level. Still
these are much less public courts simply because it is
lawyer versus lawyer or issue versus issue with no
witnesses and no jury.
Attributes called for in a trial judge are n<»t
identical with judges serving on an appellate level,
although indeed many outstanding appellate court judges
have carried their highly desirable judicial trial
court traits to our appellate courts.
The relationship between citizen and judge
likewise is quite different. We feel the selection
process employed in filling judicial vacancies at these
two different levels should also be different. We en-
dorse the use of judicial nominating commissions for