ChatGPT invented witnesses in a murder appeal. The lawyer filed them
The New Mexico Supreme Court held attorney Stephen D. Aarons in direct contempt over a brief in a murder appeal. The brief included false testimony and wholly fabricated witnesses. The court's September 9 order says Aarons acknowledged using ChatGPT to prepare the filing. He also admitted signing it without checking its factual claims or legal authorities.
Verified 2:45 AM PDT · 2 original sources
The court fined Aarons $5,000 and referred the matter to the state disciplinary board. Reuters reports that a public defender took over the appeal. The appeal itself remains pending.
This went beyond invented case citations. The filing added people and testimony that did not exist in the record of a criminal case. The lawyer signed the brief, so he still had the duty to check it. That duty did not pass to the software vendor. The order does not decide whether ChatGPT is safe for every legal use. It shows that fluent writing cannot replace checking the record.
The disciplinary board will decide whether Aarons faces further sanctions. Courts and bar associations may also replace general warnings with required disclosures, certifications or training for AI-assisted filings. Any rule should focus on checking evidence and legal authority, not simply whether a lawyer used a named tool.
Audit the story
Original sources
Company claims remain company claims. Follow the reporting and judge the evidence directly.
- New Mexico Supreme Court via JustiaState v. Sandoval, dispositional order of direct contempt ↗
- ReutersLawyer cites fake witnesses in murder case and blames ChatGPT ↗
Continue the edition