This browser does not support the Video element.
Clayton DA apologizes for fake AI citations
Clayton County DA Tasha Mosley apologized to the Georgia Supreme Court after a prosecutor used AI to cite nonexistent cases in the high-profile Hannah Payne murder appeal.
CLAYTON COUNTY, Ga. - The Clayton County District Attorney has apologized to the Supreme Court of Georgia, after a prosecutor admitted to relying on artificial intelligence to write court briefings, which contained made-up legal citations.
"In my almost 30-year career as an attorney and 17 years as an elected official, I never imagined a situation where I would do what I am doing now," wrote DA Tasha Mosley, in a letter obtained by FOX 5's Rob DiRienzo.
Supreme Court of Georgia Chief Justice Nels Peterson said one of Mosley's prosecutors, Deborah Leslie, filed an argument with at least five citations to cases that don't exist, and at least five more citations to cases that do not support the proposition for which they're cited.
Leslie, who initially claimed the filing was altered, later admitted to using AI.
What we know:
The Chief Justice called the prosecutor out during a session at Georgia’s highest court in downtown Atlanta in the appeal of Hannah Payne.
Payne was convicted of a 2019 murder following a hit-and-run incident.
District Attorney Mosley admitted in a letter to the Chief Justice that prosecutor Leslie utilized AI for filings. Mosley told the court the prosecutor violated the office’s ethical standards by relying on the technology, which created non-existent cases to support her argument.
"While artificial intelligence has become more integrated into society, to address this ever-changing technology, our office is expanding our internet and social media use policies to address the use of artificial intelligence, Mosley wrote.
Mosley said Leslie now faces a discipline which could include a grievance with the State Bar, suspension, and loss of privileges.
Big picture view:
It's just the latest example of attorneys relying too much on artificial intelligence, and getting caught red-handed.
"We've seen judges reprimand them," said Tom Church, a metro Atlanta trial attorney. "We haven't seen it on this kind of platform, you know, with the Supreme Court, and we haven't seen it from a prosecutor."
Church says the use of AI in high-level legal proceedings carries significant professional responsibility.
"This is a really significant tool that's letting lawyers do way more than they could have," Church said. "We got to double check. Any time you see AI, I think I'm triple checking." The Chief Justice noted that as the power and reach of AI advances rapidly, the judicial system must keep up with the changing landscape.
Last month, during his State of the Judiciary address at the Capitol, Chief Justice Peterson warned that AI poses both risk and opportunity for the judicial system.
"As AI’s power and reach continues to advance rapidly, we all have to keep up," Peterson said. "AI poses both risk and opportunity for the judicial system."
The Source: This article is based on original reporting and documents obtained by FOX 5’s Rob DiRienzo.