People ex rel. Strodtman
293 P.3d 123
| Colo. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Strodtman was detained at DHMC in April 2011 and found gravely disabled.
- People petitioned for short-term treatment under §27-65-107 and for forcible antipsychotic medication.
- At May 9 hearing, Strodtman stipulated to certification but objected to forced medication; magistrate granted the forcible-medication order.
- DHMC administered the listed medications immediately after the hearing.
- Strodtman moved for automatic stay under C.R.C.P. 62(a); magistrate denied.
- Strodtman later entered a consent order extending certification and forcible-medication authority through Oct. 29, 2011.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the magistrate had subject matter jurisdiction | Strodtman argued lack of jurisdiction, first raised on appeal | The People contended Medina framework grants jurisdiction and magistrate has Title 27 authority | Magistrate possessed jurisdiction under Title 27 and Rule 6(e)(2)(B) |
| Whether the hearing satisfied due process under Medina | Strodtman claimed multiple hearing errors violated due process | Medina safeguards applied; proper стандарт of review and burden on People | Hearing complied with Medina elements; no reversible due process error |
| Whether the People properly qualified Dr. O’Flaherty as an expert | Dr. O’Flaherty improperly certified as expert in medicine | CRE 702 allows physicians with broad medical training to testify as experts; weight for credibility | No abuse of discretion; Dr. O’Flaherty qualified as an expert in medicine |
| Whether hearsay evidence used by medical experts was admissible | Hearsay from caseworker was improperly admitted | CRE 703 permits reliance on otherwise inadmissible data if it informs the expert’s opinion | Admissible under CRE 703 as basis for expert opinion |
| Whether Medina’s four elements were proven by clear and convincing evidence | People failed to prove incompetence, necessity, lack of less intrusive option, and compelling need | Record supported all four Medina elements by clear and convincing evidence | Medina elements satisfied; forcible medication order affirmed |
| Whether Strodtman is entitled to automatic stay under Rule 62(a) | Rule 62(a) requires automatic stay for forcible-medication order | Rule 62(a) does not apply to this final, self-executing order; discretionary stay permitted | Rule 62(a) does not automatically stay forcible medication order; discretionary stay appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Medina, 705 P.2d 961 (Colo. 1985) (statutory grant of jurisdiction; four Medina elements; burden by clear and convincing evidence)
- Hopkins v. People, 772 P.2d 624 (Colo.App. 1988) (jurisdictional or procedural support for forcible medication orders)
- People v. Taylor, 618 P.2d 1127 (Colo. 1980) (Fifth Amendment privilege not extending to civil commitment context; burden on People)
- People in Interest of Clinton, 762 P.2d 1381 (Colo.1988) (due process protections in civil proceedings; jury or bench trial option)
- Gilford v. People, 2 P.3d 120 (Colo. 2000) (two-step Gilford test for deviations and prejudice in hearings)
- Hoylman, 865 P.2d 918 (Colo.App.1993) (treatment-hearing procedures; due process guidance)
- Medina v. People, No. 2011 (follow-up) (Colo.App. 2011) (see Medina elements discussion in current context)
- Goedecke v. State, 198 Colo. 407, 603 P.2d 123 (Colo. 1979) (liberty interest; foundational due process principles)
- Cinemark USA, Inc. v. Seest, 190 P.3d 793 (Colo.App. 2008) (abuse-of-discretion standard for evidentiary rulings by trial court)
- Golob v. People, 180 P.3d 1006 (Colo. 2008) (admission of expert testimony reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Martinez v. People, 841 P.2d 383 (Colo.App.1992) (expert testimony; residency qualification)
- Pflugbeil v. People, 834 P.2d 843 (Colo.App.1992) (admissibility of expert testimony; reliance on medical records)
- Williams v. People, 790 P.2d 796 (Colo.1990) (CRE 702 scope of expert knowledge)
- Clinton v. Hoylman, 865 P.2d 918 (Colo.App.1993) (civil commitment hearing procedures)