Santa Fe, N.M. – The New Mexico Supreme Court took decisive action on Wednesday against defense lawyer Stephen Aarons, imposing a $5,000 fine and a contempt finding after his appeal brief contained entirely fabricated police testimony and fictional witnesses generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT.
Court reprimand and disciplinary referral
Justices said Aarons failed to verify the accuracy of the filing, demonstrating a lack of remorse and concern for his client. The court will refer the matter to the state attorney disciplinary board for further investigation.
How the AI error occurred
Aarons told the court that he used ChatGPT to summarize trial proceedings when he agreed to handle the appeal for Oscar Renee Sandoval, who was convicted of murdering the mother of his children and sentenced to life in prison. He admitted he did not appreciate the extent to which the AI can “hallucinate” facts, producing false statements such as a claim that the shooter wore dark pants and a white shirt.
During an August 21 hearing, Aarons explained that he fed a computer‑generated transcript and other case materials into ChatGPT, expecting a “bullet‑proof summary.” The justices expressed incredulity, with Justice C. Shannon Bacon asking, “Do you watch the news? Do you listen to the radio? Do you read anything about what’s going on in the world?” and noting that the problem of lawyers relying on AI hallucinations is a daily headline.
Attorney’s response
In a statement to Reuters, Aarons said he is remorseful and hopes the disciplinary board will view the incident as an honest mistake. “It is a lesson learned for all professionals who rely upon this powerful but sometimes unstable technology,” he said.
Broader context of AI misuse in law
The sanction adds to a growing list of cases where state and federal judges have disciplined attorneys for filing documents generated by AI tools without proper vetting. Dozens of lawyers have faced penalties for AI‑produced case citations that were inaccurate or misquoted. Aarons’ brief is the first known instance in a criminal appeal where fabricated witness testimony was submitted.
OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Impact on the pending appeal
The appeal for Sandoval remains pending. It was assigned on September 2 to public defender Kim Chavez Cook, who declined to comment. The district attorney’s office for Doña Ana County also declined to comment.
Legal experts warn that while AI can streamline research, attorneys must retain ultimate responsibility for verifying every fact and citation. The New Mexico Supreme Court’s action underscores the judiciary’s commitment to maintaining the integrity of the legal process, especially as emerging technologies become more prevalent in courtroom filings.
Original reporting: Appleton, WI News Feed (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
