The Supreme Court of New Mexico has punished Attorney Stephen Aarons with direct contempt for submitting a brief that included fabricated police testimony and other errors produced by ChatGPT. The court ordered him to appear and be punished after he admitted he had failed to confirm the factual claims or legal authority in the document before filing it.
In its order, the New Mexico Supreme Court referred Aarons to a disciplinary board for further proceedings, concluding that he “demonstrated a lack of remorse and a lack of concern for his client.”.
The fabricated brief
Before signing and filing it, Aarons told the court he had not checked the factual claims or legal authority in his AI-generated brief. Nor did he tell his client about the failure or that the brief carried multiple factual and legal misrepresentations.
A fabricated witness list was part of the document, with two officers, a family member of the victim, and a witness named Mariah Chavez all falsely testifying. The court order identified these false witnesses as Officer Michelle Amarillo, Officer Sanchez, Manal Al-Jibury, and Teresa Marquez.
The witnesses named
- Officer Michelle Amarillo
- Officer Sanchez
- Manal Al-Jibury
- Teresa Marquez
Aarons offered false testimony from Danny Stanton about receiving threats, along with false testimony from Linda Stanton concerning those threats. He likewise fabricated statements from Mariah Chavez and Teresa Marquez describing the shooter’s attire and physical characteristics.
“Respondent admitted to the Court that the brief in chief contained false testimony from wholly fabricated witnesses—Officer Michelle Amarillo, Officer Sanchez, Manal Al-Jibury, and Teresa Marquez.”
The client’s case
Oscar Renee Sandoval was sentenced to life in prison in February 2025, following a conviction for killing Shiereen Al-Jibury, who was his partner and the mother of his children. Aarons was brought in by members of the defendant’s family to handle an appeal of that conviction.
More than a year ago, in August 2025, Aarons handed in the brief that carried false testimony and other mistakes. The state of New Mexico responded with a motion to strike parts of that brief several weeks after it was received.
The admission
The court heard Aarons admit that the brief in chief included testimony from fabricated witnesses and that he misrepresented legal authority in citations to previous cases. He acknowledged that he did not verify the claims before filing.
The punishment
The New Mexico Supreme Court found Aarons guilty of direct contempt for the fabricated testimony and other errors. The court then sent him to a disciplinary board for additional action, concluding that he showed no regret over his conduct toward his client.
Further proceedings
The court has already concluded that Aarons demonstrated a lack of concern for his client, which is a serious finding. Now a disciplinary board will take up the case and examine it further.
The case
Over 40 years into his career as a criminal defense lawyer in New Mexico, Aarons has admitted to the court that he did not examine the document before filing it. That admission stands at the heart of the court’s ruling against him.
The case shows that a lawyer’s duty to a client is not diminished by a machine. The court’s expectation of integrity remains unchanged.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.