New Mexico Court Fines Lawyer Over AI-Fabricated Witnesses
New Mexico’s Supreme Court fined Stephen Aarons $5,000 after an AI-generated murder appeal brief included fabricated witnesses and false testimony.

New Mexico's Supreme Court fined lawyer Stephen Aarons $5,000 and held him in contempt after an AI-generated appeal brief in a murder case included fabricated witnesses and false police testimony, The Verge reported from court records and Reuters coverage.
The order turned a familiar warning about generative AI into a disciplinary result.
The court found that Aarons failed to verify factual claims and legal authority in the brief before filing it on behalf of a client appealing a murder conviction.
The false material went beyond invented case citations.
The filing described testimony from witnesses who did not exist and added false testimony about the shooter's clothing and appearance, creating a record problem inside a criminal appeal rather than a cosmetic drafting error.
During an August hearing, Aarons acknowledged using ChatGPT and expecting it to produce what he called a “bulletproof summary” of the trial.
Justice C. Shannon Bacon pressed him on how he missed the risk, asking whether he followed news about lawyers relying on AI hallucinations.
Courts have been encountering more filings with fabricated AI-generated citations as lawyers add chatbots to research and drafting workflows.
The New Mexico case shows the problem can also reach witness accounts and trial facts, where verification failures can distort the underlying record.
For legal teams, the operative condition is now clear: AI-assisted drafting does not move responsibility away from the lawyer who signs and files the work.
The court's sanction makes verification of model output part of professional practice, not an optional quality check.




















