Some of Alaska’s judges are on this year’s ballot, and YOU will decide if they should remain judges when you vote for retention.

Judges don’t run against anyone and normally are not allowed to campaign, so you might want information to help you decide for yourself how to vote on them. And voters from entire judicial districts vote on the same judges, so Alaskans in the Anchorage area, the Mat-Su Valley, and the Kenai will all vote on judges in Anchorage (because the Third Judicial District is large and includes those areas).

These five judges want you to learn about them so you can make an informed decision. Take a look at their information below to learn more about the work they’re doing to serve you and the great State of Alaska, and why they would be honored to continue to do so.

Anchorage Superior Court

Dani Crosby

Anchorage Superior Court | Third Judicial District

Dani Crosby

Judge Crosby was appointed to the Anchorage Superior Court in November of 2015. This is her first retention evaluation. Judge Crosby is assigned a civil caseload.


Personal Statement

This is my first retention election. I have learned a great deal in my position as a superior court judge in Anchorage since being appointed in 2015, and I enjoy the job very much.

I strive to give every case the attention it deserves by being prepared and ensuring that each party has the opportunity to be fully heard. I do my best to judge each case fairly. I also do my utmost to treat litigants with respect: the experience of coming to court can be difficult enough, and I try to make parties comfortable while still maintaining the dignity of the courtroom.

If you vote to retain me, please know that I will continue to work hard for the people of the State of Alaska, and that I would be honored to continue to serve.

Alaska is such a special place. My daughter and I enjoy getting outside together, as does our dog, Remy (who is one of four pets, including a rabbit, fish, and hamster). Our other hobbies include baking enormous and unnecessary amounts of sweets.

Thank you for reading my statement.

Judge Dani Crosby Judge Dani Crosby Judge Dani Crosby
Judge Dani Crosby
Judge Dani Crosby

Performance Findings

The Council conducts a thorough performance review of each judge standing for retention. Key findings for Judge Crosby include:

  • Ratings by justice system professionals: Attorneys and social services professionals who appeared before Judge Crosby gave her very good reviews, as did court employees. The chart shows the survey ratings received by Judge Crosby.
  • Ratings by jurors: The Judicial Council surveyed jurors who served in trials before Judge Crosby during 2018 and 2019. The jurors rated Judge Crosby 5.0 overall on a five-point scale. One juror commented, “Excellent courtroom management. Clear and concise on instructions, and easy to follow instructions.”
  • Professional activities: The Council’s review of Judge Crosby’s professional activities showed significant contributions to her community and to the administration of justice. Judge Crosby served as the Chair of the court system’s Civil Rules Committee, and she was a member of the Judicial Conduct Rules and Trauma-Informed Courts committees. She regularly volunteered at the Pioneer Home and organized a “morning of music” at the Anchorage courthouse with a nationally recognized cellist performing.
  • Other performance indicators: The Council’s review of other performance indicators, including Judge Crosby’s financial and conflict of interest statements, disqualifications from cases, and appellate reversal rates, raised no performance concerns.
  • Timeliness: Alaska law requires judges’ pay be withheld if a decision is pending longer than six months. The Council verified that Judge Crosby was paid on schedule, and she certified that she had no untimely decisions.
  • Ethics: There were no public disciplinary proceedings against Judge Crosby, and the Council’s review found no ethical concerns.

Andrew Guidi

Anchorage Superior Court | Third Judicial District

Andrew Guidi

Judge Guidi was appointed to the Superior Court in July of 2010. This is his second retention evaluation. Judge Guidi handles a mostly civil caseload with a small number of criminal cases.


Personal Statement

As John Adams said, “We are a government of laws, and not of men.” There can, therefore, be no more important public obligation than to be entrusted by the citizens of Alaska with the responsibility of fairly, faithfully and impartially applying the laws of this state. In response to this trust, I am committed to deciding each case fairly and impartially, according to the law, and I will continue to work hard to decide each case in a timely manner and fully explain the reasons for my decisions.

In addition, I am acutely aware that the court system could not function without the selfless dedication of the many citizens who serve as jurors in our cases. Juries are the fundamental unit of representative government; they serve to ensure that every person stands equally before the law and is fairly judged. I will continue to do my utmost to support and assist juries as they attempt to fulfill their role. This will include modifying the traditional manner in which we select jurors and try cases in order to deal with the COVID-19 environment.

It is a privilege and an honor to serve the citizens of Alaska as a Superior Court Judge.

Judge Andrew Guidi Judge Andrew Guidi Judge Andrew Guidi
Judge Andrew Guidi
Judge Andrew Guidi

Performance Findings

The Council conducts a thorough performance review of each judge standing for retention. Key findings for Judge Guidi include:

  • Ratings by justice system professionals: Attorneys and social services professionals who appeared before Judge Guidi gave him very good reviews, as did court employees. The chart shows the survey ratings received by Judge Guidi.
  • Ratings by jurors: Jurors who served in trials before Judge Guidi during 2018 and 2019 rated him 5.0 overall on a five-point scale. One juror commented, “Judge Guidi was impressive and compassionate to all parties.”
  • Professional activities: The Council’s review of Judge Guidi’s professional activities showed positive contributions to his community and to the administration of justice. Judge Guidi served on the Anchorage Child in Need of Aid Therapeutic Court, a court for families involved in the child welfare system as a result of substance abuse. He served on the court system’s Child in Need of Aid Court Improvement Committee (a group that works to improve the court system’s handling of cases involving the child welfare system), and the court system’s Civil Rules Committee. He has spoken to Scout meetings upon invitation.
  • Other performance indicators: The Council’s review of other performance indicators, including Judge Guidi’s financial and conflict of interest statements, disqualifications from cases, and appellate reversal rates, raised no performance concerns.
  • Timeliness: Alaska law requires judges’ pay be withheld if a decision is pending longer than six months. The Council verified that Judge Guidi was paid on schedule, and he certified that he had no untimely decisions.
  • Ethics: There were no public disciplinary proceedings against Judge Guidi, and the Council’s review found no ethical concerns.

Jennifer S. Henderson

Anchorage Superior Court | Third Judicial District

Jennifer S. Henderson

Judge Henderson was appointed to the Anchorage Superior Court in May of 2017. This is her first retention evaluation as a superior court judge. Judge Henderson handles primarily civil cases, and a smaller number of criminal cases on a special calendar.


Personal Statement

Since coming to Alaska in 2001, I have felt so fortunate to get to live and work in this amazing state. My work prior to becoming a judge, both as a prosecutor with the Anchorage District Attorney’s Office, and subsequently as a litigator handling a wide variety of civil and administrative matters, has provided valuable experience and preparation for my current work.

It has been an honor to serve my community, initially as a District Court Judge for four years, and more recently, as a judge on the Anchorage Superior Court for the last three years. As a Superior Court Judge, I preside over many different types of cases, including civil, family, probate, Child-In-Need-of-Aid, and criminal matters. I approach all cases that come before me with a dedication to listening impartially to the parties, to hearing the relevant evidence, and to applying the law consistently and fairly. I am committed to assuring that all people are able to access and understand what is happening in the courtroom, and ultimately able to understand the decisions that I make about their cases. I am mindful that the people who appear before me in court are there pursuing cases and/or defenses that are of the utmost importance in their lives, deserving of my time, attention, and respect. I am grateful to have this opportunity to serve the State of Alaska and its citizens, and look forward to continuing to serve the public in this manner.

Outside of work, my husband and I love sharing adventures with our two children, whether that be snow machining out to our family cabin or creating our version of the world’s most elaborate scavenger hunt.

Judge Jennifer S. Henderson Judge Jennifer S. Henderson Judge Jennifer S. Henderson
Judge Jennifer S. Henderson
Judge Jennifer S. Henderson

Performance Findings

The Council conducts a thorough performance review of each judge standing for retention. Key findings for Judge Henderson include:

  • Ratings by justice system professionals: Attorneys, law enforcement officers, and social services professionals who appeared before Judge Henderson gave her very good reviews, as did court employees. The chart shows the survey ratings received by Judge Henderson.
  • Ratings by jurors: Jurors who served in trials before Judge Henderson during 2018 and 2019 rated her 5.0 overall on a five-point scale. One juror commented, “Judge Henderson was wonderful. I appreciate how fair, patient, kind and knowledgeable [she was]. She kept us well-informed as the legal process.”
  • Professional activities: The Council’s review of Judge Henderson’s professional activities showed significant contributions to her community and to the administration of justice. Judge Henderson managed a centralized calendar to process criminal cases involving defendants whose competency to stand trial was questioned. She also presided over a mental health therapeutic court, and served as a Training Judge for magistrate judges. She made presentations to community groups about the role of a judge and other topics.
  • Other performance indicators: The Council’s review of other performance indicators, including Judge Henderson’s financial and conflict of interest statements, disqualifications from cases, and appellate reversal rates, raised no performance concerns.
  • Timeliness: Alaska law requires judges’ pay be withheld if a decision is pending longer than six months. The Council verified that Judge Henderson was paid on schedule, and she certified that she had no untimely decisions.
  • Ethics: There were no public disciplinary proceedings against Judge Henderson, and the Council’s review found no ethical concerns.

Yvonne Lamoureux

Anchorage Superior Court | Third Judicial District

Yvonne Lamoureux

Judge Lamoureux was appointed to the Anchorage Superior Court in May of 2017. This is her first retention evaluation. Judge Lamoureux handles a primarily civil caseload, and a small number of criminal cases.


Personal Statement

Since 2017, I have had the privilege of serving as a Superior Court Judge, presiding over primarily civil matters. I love the variety of my caseload, from complex civil litigation to administrative appeals to custody cases to involuntary mental health commitments to child-in-need-of-aid cases. However, that wide range of case types requires legal knowledge in many different areas of the law and an equally diverse role of the judge in the courtroom. I believe it is of utmost importance to be prepared for every hearing to be able to best serve the parties in their cases, and I have worked diligently to do so. I remain committed to provide a forum where parties can present their cases, to listen to their positions, and to apply the law fairly and impartially. I am committed to public service and would be honored to continue serving in this role.

I first came to Alaska in 2001 on a backpacking and fishing trip with my father. I was hooked. Alaska has been my home for the last 16 years. I graduated from Columbia University and the University of Virginia School of Law. After serving as a law clerk in state and federal courts, I worked in private practice at Heller Ehrman and Stoel Rives. I later became a federal prosecutor, handling criminal investigations, trials, and appeals. I have traveled our wonderful state for work and pleasure (rafting, fishing, climbing). My husband and I have been married for 14 years, and are thankful to be raising our child here.

Judge Yvonne Lamoureux Judge Yvonne Lamoureux Judge Yvonne Lamoureux
Judge Yvonne Lamoureux
Judge Yvonne Lamoureux

Performance Findings

The Council conducts a thorough performance review of each judge standing for retention. Key findings for Judge Lamoureux include:

  • Ratings by justice system professionals: Attorneys and social services professionals who appeared before Judge Lamoureux gave her very good reviews, as did court employees. The chart shows the survey ratings received by Judge Lamoureux.
  • Ratings by jurors: Jurors who served in trials before Judge Lamoureux during 2018 and 2019 rated her 5.0 overall on a five-point scale. One juror commented, “I was very impressed with Judge Lamoureux. She was professional, communicative, kind and always expressed her thanks to us as jurors.”
  • Professional activities: The Council’s review of Judge Lamoureux’s professional activities showed significant contributions to her community and to the administration of justice. Judge Lamoureux served on the court system’s Child in Need of Aid Court Improvement Committee (to improve the court system’s handling of child welfare cases), and on a committee that reviews the rules and procedures governing juvenile delinquency and child welfare cases. She also serves as a judge in the court system’s Early Resolution Program (an initiative designed to create more timely resolutions for divorce cases). She volunteered at mock trials and participated in community and school events.
  • Other performance indicators: The Council’s review of other performance indicators, including Judge Lamoureux’s financial and conflict of interest statements, disqualifications from cases, and appellate reversal rates, raised no performance concerns.
  • Timeliness: Alaska law requires judges’ pay be withheld if a decision is pending longer than six months. The Council verified that Judge Lamoureux was paid on schedule, and she certified that she had no untimely decisions.
  • Ethics: There were no public disciplinary proceedings against Judge Lamoureux, and the Council’s review found no ethical concerns.

Gregory Miller

Anchorage Superior Court | Third Judicial District

Gregory Miller

Judge Miller was appointed to the Anchorage Superior Court in January of 2011. This is his second retention evaluation. Judge Miller handles a mostly civil caseload, and a smaller number of criminal cases.


Personal Statement

I have been honored to serve the Anchorage community as a superior court judge since February 2011. I am committed to conducting all hearings and trials fairly and impartially, and I’m especially committed to neutrally applying to each case the laws as passed by the legislature and enacted by the governor. I make sure I listen to each person’s position and try to treat every person who comes to the courtroom with dignity and respect. I always want the parties and everyone else in the courtroom — victims, family members, and the general public — to understand what is being said and what’s likely to happen next. I also take pride in giving my decisions as quickly and with as much explanation as possible, because I know that waiting for a ruling can be stressful and difficult for parties.

I have traveled to other court locations for hearings and trials; I am pleased to do this because I enjoy getting to know the people and communities outside Anchorage. I will continue to volunteer for those cases so that the important issues and conflicts affecting Alaskans outside the urban centers are resolved carefully, promptly, and justly.

I very much appreciate and enjoy the privilege of serving as a judge and look forward to continuing to provide impartial and timely decisions in every case that comes before me.

I’ve lived here in Alaska for about 35 years.  When I’m not working at the court, I spend my time flying, fishing, building an experimental airplane at a hangar at the Birchwood airport, doing LOTS of household chores and building projects, and spending time with my wife, our two grown kids, and close friends. I’m honored to serve the State of Alaska as a judge.

Judge Gregory Miller Judge Gregory Miller Judge Gregory Miller
Judge Gregory Miller
Judge Gregory Miller

Performance Findings

The Council conducts a thorough performance review of each judge standing for retention. Key findings for Judge Miller include:

  • Ratings by justice system professionals: Attorneys, law enforcement officers, and social services professionals who appeared before Judge Miller gave him good reviews, as did court employees. The chart shows the survey ratings received by Judge Miller.
  • Professional activities: The Council’s review of Judge Miller’s professional activities showed significant contributions to his community and to the administration of justice. Judge Miller served as Chair of the Newer Judge Training Committee (to organize and present an annual conference for judges during their first three years on the bench). He organized the court system’s mentoring program for new judges, and served as a mentor to new judges.
  • Other performance indicators:The Council’s review of other performance indicators, including Judge Miller’s financial and conflict of interest statements, disqualifications from cases, and appellate reversal rates, raised no performance concerns.
  • Timeliness: Alaska law requires judges’ pay be withheld if a decision is pending longer than six months. The Council verified that Judge Miller was paid on schedule, and he certified that he had no untimely decisions.
  • Ethics: There were no public disciplinary proceedings against Judge Miller, and the Council’s review found no ethical concerns.
AnchorageJudges.com. For more information visit:
Alaska Division of Elections  •   Find your Polling Place  •   Alaska Judicial Council  •   Alaska Court System