Skip to content

Incident Tracker / United States (state)

Moses v. State

·Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee·US-STATEFiling struckprovisional

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee on 2026-02-25 in Moses v. State found the self-represented party's appellate brief contained one citation defect involving nonexistent authorities, incorrect statutory or rule text. The court dismissed claims or denied relief after identifying the defective authorities.

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
Date
2026-02-25
Who used the AI
Litigant in person
AI tool
Not identified in the record
Conduct
Moses’s appellate brief contained several citation errors and at least one fictitious case; the court disregarded legal authorities it could not verify as authentic.
Outcome
Filing struck
Penalty
No monetary penalty recorded
Regulatory outcome
No separate regulatory disposition recorded
Status
Provisional — written by the court-decisions pipeline, awaiting the editor
Last checked
2026-09-07

Primary sources for this incident

Related regulation records for this incident

No related regulation record has been linked to this incident yet.

Similar incidents on the record

  • Shannon v. Shannon, 322 Neb. 451 (2026), No. S-25-5462026-10-02 · Nebraska Supreme Court · Filing struckIn Nebraska, the state Supreme Court struck a self-represented divorce litigant's appellate brief for fictitious citations produced by his admitted AI use. Extending Prososki v. Regan to unrepresented parties, it held s…
  • Tapscott v. Fariss, No. 25-1666 (Iowa Ct. App. 2026)2026-10-07 · Court of Appeals of Iowa · DismissalIn the Court of Appeals of Iowa, a self-represented appellant's final brief in a protective-order appeal contained multiple hallucinated case citations. After two earlier briefs were struck and the appellant failed to a…
  • Washington v. Justice, No. 2D2025-2678 (Fla. 2d DCA 2026)2026-10-07 · District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District · DismissalIn Florida's Second District Court of Appeal, self-represented appellants filed a brief citing eleven cases the court could not find and likely generated by AI. After an unavailing show-cause response and a pattern of f…
  • R. M. v. Mohr, 353 Or App 182 (2026), A1880922026-09-23 · Oregon Court of Appeals · FineIn Oregon, the Court of Appeals ordered a self-represented restraining-order appellant to pay $250 after his brief cited three fabricated cases he admitted came from AI. The court had threatened $1,500, at $500 per fake…

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Moses v. State”, safelegalai.com/tracker/moses-v-state (accessed 2026-10-07). Data: CC BY 4.0.

Report an issue with this record →