TECHNOLOGY · VERIFIED DEVELOPMENT
New Mexico Supreme Court Holds ChatGPT‑Using Lawyer in Contempt for Fabricated Testimony
WHY IT MATTERS
The ruling signals that courts will scrutinize AI‑generated legal submissions and that attorneys may face disciplinary action for failing to verify AI output, reinforcing professional accountability in the digital age.
What happened
The New Mexico Supreme Court found criminal‑defense attorney Stephen Aarons in direct contempt after he filed a brief that contained false testimony from entirely fabricated witnesses, including fake police statements. Aarons admitted he did not verify the factual claims or legal authority in the AI‑generated brief before signing and filing it, and he failed to inform his client of the errors.
The court noted his lack of remorse and concern for the client, Oscar Renee Sandoval, whose murder conviction was being appealed. Aarons, a 40‑year veteran of the New Mexico bar, was hired by Sandoval’s family to challenge the life‑sentence imposed in February 2025.
The Supreme Court referred Aarons to the state disciplinary board for further proceedings.
PRIMARY SOURCES
ChatGPT-using lawyer punished for citing fake testimony from made-up witnesses
Ars Technica · Jon Brodkin · Discovery only; Condé Nast copyright terms apply
CORRECTIONS & UPDATES
- Revision 1 · Initial ingestion · Sep 11, 2026, 10:00 PM
- Revision 2 · Source update detected · Sep 11, 2026, 10:00 PM
- Revision 3 · Source update detected · Sep 11, 2026, 10:00 PM