DENVER -- A judicial review committee took the rare step of recommending that a Pueblo judge, who was a focus of a CALL7 investigation, not be retained.

Pueblo District Judge Jill Mattoon oversaw cases of involuntary medication at the Colorado Mental Health Institute at Pueblo when a patient was overmedicated and died, court and medical record show. Mattoon’s husband, Rick Mattoon, works in the state attorney general’s office advising CMHIP.

“In this case you could ask did she favor one side over the other because of her marital relationship,” said Daniel Vigil, a member of the advisory committee to the Office of Attorney Regulation. “We don’t know the answer to that, but it doesn’t matter because it creates the question, and the question is what we are concerned about.”

Attorney regulation investigated the conflict with regard to Rick Mattoon's but declined to proceed with discipline. The judge's disciplinary committee also took note of the issue but their deliberations are private.

However, the attorneys and others conducting Mattoon’s judicial performance evaluation voted 8-1 to recommend to voters to not retain her in the coming November election.

They cited an unspecified conflict of interest as well as other problems with her performance.

“Judge Mattoon received the lowest evaluation scores in our District and she was significantly below the state average in all five evaluated categories,” the commission wrote, citing her reversals on appeal, the conflict of interest and the fact that she often does not write her own rulings.

The commission wrote:

- "Judge Mattoon’s lack of basic legal knowledge (is) disconcerting and problematic." - "She simply has not demonstrated many of the qualities that this commission believes our community has a right to expect of our district court judges." - "Judge Mattoon does not voluntarily recuse herself from situations which present an obvious conflict of interest."

The commission did not specify the conflict but a source confirmed it had to do with a case involving the state mental hospital.

Mattoon did not return a call seeking comment, but defended herself, saying the commission included a number of people who worked for defendants and no law enforcement representatives.

“I respect and welcome constructive criticism, striving to improve every day,” Mattoon wrote in her response to the commission.

In the 7News original stories about Mattoon’s potential conflict, both Mattoons declined comment, but Attorney General John Suthers defended the couple.

“I know it when I see it and this is not -- this is not a conflict of interest," Suthers told CALL7 Investigators John Ferrugia. “You have impugned the integrity of two very good public servants.”

Suthers, through a spokesman, maintained there was no conflict but would not comment on Mattoon’s judicial evaluation or repeat the charge of impugning the couple's reputation.

State records show that between 1988 and 2008, there have been 949 judges on the ballot, and the commission has recommended that only 15 not be retained. Voters have voted not to retain seven judges. In that 30 years, the commission issued no opinion on 10 judges.

Rating commissions are set up in each judicial district and one statewide. They contain six non-attorneys and four attorneys and are appointed by the governor, speaker of the state House, president of the state Senate and the chief justice of the state Supreme Court. The commissions make their recommendations on election years.