Aarons’ reasoning for trusting ChatGPT, he said in the August hearing, was that he’d heard of doctors using AI for medical research. 

“So, Counsel, do you watch the news? Do you listen to the radio? Do you read anything about what's going on in the world?” one of the judges asked Aarons. “Because the problem with lawyers relying on AI hallucinations is an above-the-fold story every single day.”

…

“So, either you buried your head in the sand. And that's a choice to do that. An intentional choice to be uninformed,” the judge continued to Aarons. “Or, you took a gamble. And neither of those are consistent with the code of conduct. So I'm really struggling with your response, saying, ‘Well, I didn't understand. I didn't know about hallucinations.’ My 13-year-old nephew knows about hallucinations. My 75-year-old stepmother knows about hallucinations. So, either you made a decision not to be aware of what's happening in the world in using this tool appropriately, which is a willful choice. Or you decided to roll the dice.”

“So you didn't say, ‘I relied on ChatGPT, and it submitted lies to the court, and the court is mad at me, and now there's a hearing.’ I'm guessing you didn't tell your client’s family members that,” a judge asked Aarons.

“I didn't talk about ChatGPT. I just said there was a problem with a brief that I filed,” Aarons said.

There needs to be a rule that anyone who does this should be immediately disbarred

Last I checked, submitting false testimony was a crime. If these lawyer stop getting slaps on the wrist, the slop legal work will stop.

It seems whatever actions courts are taking, it's not enough if it keeps happening.

Aarons was sanctioned $5,000

How much do lawyers charge to defend a murder charge? I'm guessing a lot more than that.

“It's little comfort to know that my stupidity is what brings us together this afternoon,” New Mexico attorney Stephen D. Aarons said in a hearing last month before five judges. He “assumed” ChatGPT would generate a “bulletproof summary of proceedings.” Instead, ChatGPT generated false testimony from “wholly fabricated witnesses,” according to an order of direct contempt from the New Mexico Supreme Court.

Aarons’ reasoning for trusting ChatGPT, he said in the August hearing, was that he’d heard of doctors using AI for medical research.

According to the order, the judges found Aarons to be in direct contempt of court, referred him to the Disciplinary Board for further consideration, and barred from appearing before the court pending the outcome of the board’s investigation. They also threw him off the case in question and assigned a public defender to his former client.

If they don't feel the consequences themselves, lawyers will just continue to use LLMs to do their research.

This is another example why we need LLMs to be required to cite sources.

Can't fix stupid.

But I don't have to interact with it.

In the past, I've advocated for people to not use AI. I think I've changed my mind just now.

Everyone should be required to use AI - that way, we can see how stupid they are when they don't check it.

Aarons said he hadn’t told his client directly that he was caught using ChatGPT on the case because he’s currently serving life in prison.

He got called out on this by the judge, too.

I use AI for some of the documents i create

I also read and iterate on what it writes

Don't trust the hallucination machine

Think he saw this ai summary and got all excited like, look at all this evidence in support of reasonable doubt for my client's guilt! Guess the previous defense just ignored all this obviously helpful witness testimony for some reason...

At least he was only using it for a low stakes case: the guy was found guilty of murder and is now in prison for life.

Just wait till the judges also run AI for their end of it. The AI slop might get green lit / rubber stamps.

Jesus fuck

America is overworked into apathy

At least there were consequences.

I cerainly hope he is removed from the bar for this. I'm shocked he wasn't held in contempt.