A New Mexico defense lawyer has been held in contempt and fined $5,000 after submitting a murder appeal brief filled with fabricated witness testimony generated by ChatGPT.
Stephen Aarons, a Santa Fe private practice attorney, was working on the appeal of Oscar Renee Sandoval, who was convicted last year and sentenced to life in prison for murdering the mother of his children. The appeal included fictional statements that the shooter was wearing dark pants and a white shirt, according to the state Supreme Court’s ruling Wednesday.
Aarons admitted he used OpenAI’s chatbot to summarize details of the trial proceedings. He claimed he did not realize the technology was prone to “hallucinating” facts.
“I am remorseful but hopeful that the disciplinary board takes into account it was an honest mistake,” he said.
“It is a lesson learned for all professionals who rely upon this powerful but sometimes unstable technology.”
However, the state Supreme Court justices rejected his characterization of events. They found that Aarons “demonstrated a lack of remorse and a lack of concern for the client” by using AI in his work.
The justices’ skepticism about Aarons’ claimed ignorance was on full display at an Aug. 21 hearing about the fabricated brief.
“Counsel, do you watch the news? Do you listen to the radio? Do you read anything about what’s going on in the world?” Justice C. Shannon Bacon asked at the hearing.
“Because the problem with lawyers relying on AI hallucinations is an above-the-fold story every single day.”
The court’s ruling described the brief as containing “false testimony from wholly fabricated witnesses.”
The appeal has since been reassigned. On Sept. 2, it was transferred to public defender Kim Chavez Cook.
Aarons will also face additional professional consequences beyond the contempt fine. The justices said he will be referred to an attorney disciplinary board for further investigation.
The Sandoval case itself involved a man who pleaded not guilty to gunning down the mother of his kids before his conviction and life sentence. The appeal Aarons filed sought to challenge that outcome, but the inclusion of AI-invented details about the shooter’s clothing and witness accounts who never existed threw the proceedings into turmoil.
The incident adds to a growing pattern of legal professionals facing sanctions for relying on AI tools that invent case law, citations, and now witness testimony. Courts across multiple states have begun issuing warnings and penalties as the technology’s risks become more widely documented in professional settings.
Aarons’ disciplinary board referral means he could face additional penalties ranging from reprimand to suspension or disbarment depending on what the investigation finds.
The Sandoval appeal will continue under new representation as the courts work to address the damage caused by the fabricated filings.