New Mexico's Supreme Court has fined lawyer Stephen Aarons $5,000 and held him in contempt after he submitted an AI-generated appeal brief containing fabricated witnesses and false police testimony in a client's murder conviction case. Aarons admitted using ChatGPT, believing it would produce a "bulletproof summary" of the trial, but failed to verify the factual claims and legal citations before filing, prompting sharp criticism from the bench about the now widely known risks of AI hallucinations in legal work.

The court's filing stated the brief included "false testimony from wholly fabricated witnesses" as well as inaccurate testimony about the shooter's clothing and appearance. During an August hearing, Justice C. Shannon Bacon rebuked Aarons for being seemingly unaware of AI's pitfalls, noting that lawyers relying on AI hallucinations has become "an above-the-fold story every single day." The case follows similar incidents, including a firm sanctioned last year for false citations and lawyers for Mike Lindell fined over AI-generated misquotes, reflecting a growing pattern of legal professionals facing penalties for unchecked AI use.