People in Interest of Lozsi

── People in Interest of Lozsi ── Court: Colorado Court of Appeals Date: June 04, 2026 Category: General 26CA0558 Peo in Interest of Lozsi 06-04-2026 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 26CA0558 Pueblo County District Court No. 26MH30027 Honorable Gregory J. Styduhar, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Petitioner-Appellee, In the Interest of Brian Tolley Lozsi, Respondent-Appellant. ORDER AFFIRMED Division V Opinion by JUDGE SCHUTZ Lipinsky and Yun, JJ., concur NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e) Announced June 4, 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 Respondent, Brian Tolley Lozsi, appeals the district court’s March 16, 2026, order authorizing the involuntary administration of antipsychotic medications for the purpose of restoring him to competency to stand trial in a criminal case. We affirm. I. Background ¶2 Lozsi was charged with multiple felonies in Adams County Case No. 24CR156 and found incompetent to stand trial. He was ordered to undergo competency restoration and has been receiving inpatient treatment at the Colorado Mental Health Hospital in Pueblo, where his psychiatrist diagnosed him with delusional disorder. This disorder causes him to be detached from reality and to express persistent delusions primarily of a sexual nature. ¶3 After Lozsi began refusing antipsychotic medication, the People petitioned the district court to authorize the involuntary administration of two medications. Following a hearing on March 16, 2026, the court found that the People had satisfied the four factors required by Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166, 178 (2003), for the involuntary administration of medications to restore a person’s competency to stand trial. Therefore, the court granted the petition and authorized the involuntary administration of Risperdal 1  (risperidone), with Haldol (haloperidol) injections as a backup option in the event Lozsi refused Risperdal. The court also ordered all necessary lab work and testing to monitor the medication levels and side effects. By its express terms, and “unless otherwise ordered by the court,” the order “continue[s] through the completion” of Lozsi’s Adams County criminal trial in case no. 24CR156. II. Discussion ¶4 Lozsi contends that the evidence presented at the hearing was insufficient to support the involuntary medication order. Though he concedes that sufficient evidence supported the first, third, and fourth Sell factors, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the second factor. We disagree. A. Standard of Review ¶5 Divisions of this court have issued varying opinions about the appropriate standard of review when applying the Sell factors. Compare People in Interest of Hardesty, 2014 COA 138, ¶¶ 15-17 (identifying eight Sell factors and applying both the de novo and clear error standards to the first factor, de novo review to the second factor, and clear error review to the remaining six factors), 2  with People in Interest of R.F., 2019 COA 110, ¶ 21 (identifying four Sell factors and applying de novo review to the first factor and clear error review for the remaining three factors). See also People in Interest of Joergensen, 2022 COA 126, ¶¶ 11-12 (noting that there are “four [Sell] elements” and stating that “[t]he resolution of a Sell motion presents a mixed question of fact and law”). ¶6 Although Lozsi asserts that our review is de novo, we agree with R.F. that a district court’s findings with respect to the second Sell factor — the only f