CourtListener 10840479•Peo in Interest of Pilove
Full text
26CA0235 Peo in Interest of Pilove 04-09-2026
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS
Court of Appeals No. 26CA0235
Pueblo County District Court No. 26MH30006
Honorable Amiel Markenson, Judge
The People of the State of Colorado,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
In the Interest of Matthew Pilove,
Respondent-Appellant.
ORDER AFFIRMED
Division V
Opinion by JUDGE LIPINSKY
Welling and Tow, JJ., concur
NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e)
Announced April 9, 2026
Cynthia Mitchell, County Attorney, Kate H. Shafer, Special Assistant County
Attorney, Pueblo, Colorado, for Petitioner-Appellee
Tezak Law P.C., Mary Tezak, Florence, Colorado for Respondent-Appellant
¶1 Matthew Pilove appeals the district court order authorizing
staff at the Colorado Mental Health Hospital in Pueblo (CMHHIP) to
medicate him against his will. We affirm.
I. Background
¶2 Pilove was admitted to CMHHIP after being found not guilty by
reason of insanity in a criminal case. According to the affidavit and
testimony of Dr. Hareesh Pillai, the physician supervising Pilove’s
treatment, Pilove had a long history of mental illness and
psychiatric hospitalizations. Dr. Pillai testified that he diagnosed
Pilove with schizoaffective disorder and that, “[w]hen not adequately
treated with medications, he exhibits symptoms, including
paranoia, delusional ideation, and hallucinations that affect his
thinking and behavior.” In late December 2025, Pilove began
refusing his psychiatric medications. At that time, he also became
agitated and aggressive toward staff and, according to the medical
staff at CMHHIP, “required seclusion and restraint.” Pilove was
involuntarily medicated on an emergency basis before the State
petitioned for a six-month order permitting the involuntary
administration of (1) Zyprexa and lithium on a daily basis and
1
(2) Haldol, if needed for acute agitation or if Pilove refused to take
lithium orally.
¶3 At the evidentiary hearing in this case, Dr. Pillai testified that
an involuntary medication order was warranted under the four
elements set forth in People v. Medina, 705 P.2d 961 (Colo. 1985),
because (1) Pilove is incompetent to effectively participate in his
treatment decisions; (2) the requested medications are necessary to
prevent a significant and likely long-term deterioration in his
mental health condition and to prevent the likelihood that he would
pose a serious risk of harm to himself and others; (3) a less
intrusive treatment alternative is not available; and (4) Pilove’s need
for treatment with psychiatric medications outweighs any bona fide
interest in refusing treatment. See id. at 973. The district court
found that Dr. Pillai’s testimony was credible and persuasive and
adopted his opinions. Pilove testified that he objected to taking the
requested medications because (1) using drugs to treat mental
illness is contrary to his Rastafarian religious beliefs; and
(2) Zyprexa causes him to become hungry and have an increased
appetite, and lithium makes him sleepy and “a little more
depress[ed].” The district court concluded that Dr. Pillai’s affidavit
2
and testimony provided clear and convincing evidence for each of
the four Medina elements. It therefore authorized CMHHIP staff to
administer the requested medications to Pilove involuntarily.
II. Discussion
¶4 On appeal, Pilove only challenges the sufficiency of the
evidence supporting the fourth Medina element — whether his need
for treatment is sufficiently compelling to override his bona fide and
legitimate interest in refusing treatment. See id. Pilove’s sole
argument is that the district court erred by finding he had not
demonstrated a bona fide and legitimate interest in refusal.
¶5 The record refutes the factual basis for Pilove’s argument. In
both its ruling from the bench at the evidentiary hearing and its
written order, the district court found that Pilove’s interest in
refusal was bona fide and legitimate based on his “religious
preference” and the alleged side effects he described. But in
applying the fourth Medina element, the court found by clear and
convincing evidence that Pilove’s prognosis without treatment was
so unfavorable that his “personal preference must yield” to the
state’s “legitimate interest in preserving” his “life and health” and
protecting the safety of those in CMHHIP. Id. at 974. The court
3
pointed to Dr. Pillai’s testimony that, without medication, Pilove
was at risk of significant long-term deterioration. The court
specifically noted Pilove’s suicide attempts; refusal to eat at times,
which required placement of a feeding tube; aggressiveness toward
others; and inability to care for himself. Because ample evidence in
the record supports the district court’s findings and conclusion
regarding the fourth Medina element, we perceive no basis for
reversal. See People in Interest of A.J.L., 243 P.3d 244, 255 (Colo.
2010).
III. Disposition
¶6 The order authorizing the involuntary administration of
psychiatric medication is affirmed.
JUDGE WELLING and JUDGE TOW concur.
4
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.