HomeCasesAlamleh c. R.

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Alamleh c. R.

SC Quebec · Feb 11, 2026

CanadaEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authoritycriminal

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The Canadian court dismissed the application and included a preliminary discussion of the applicant's use of artificial intelligence, emphasizing the need to review materials generated with such tools before filing them with the court.

Why the court cared: Fabricated: Case Law | Representations contained references to inexistent case law identified on review by the Court. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | Representations cited an inexistent statute described as the 'Code of Criminal Procedure'. || Fabricated: Case Law | Included inexistent paragraph/pinpoint references to existing judgments (invented paragraph numbers). || Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Contained inaccurate/misstated references to the judgment on conviction.
Why it matters now: Pro-se criminal appellant cited a non-existent Code of Criminal Procedure — courts catch invented statutes as fast as invented cases.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Pro-se criminal appellant cited a non-existent Code of Criminal Procedure — courts catch invented statutes as fast as invented cases.

Record details

CourtSC Quebec

Jurisdictioninternational

Circuit4th Circuit

DateFeb 11, 2026

AI toolUnidentified

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeSee source

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

not established

The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

Procedural posture

Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Representations contained references to inexistent case law identified on review by the Court.
Fabricated: Legal Norm | Representations cited an inexistent statute described as the 'Code of Criminal Procedure'.
Fabricated: Case Law | Included inexistent paragraph/pinpoint references to existing judgments (invented paragraph numbers).
Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Contained inaccurate/misstated references to the judgment on conviction.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Alamleh c. R.?: The Canadian court dismissed the application and included a preliminary discussion of the applicant's use of artificial intelligence, emphasizing the need to review materials generated with such tools before filing them with the court.
Why does Alamleh c. R. matter for legal AI risk?: Pro-se criminal appellant cited a non-existent Code of Criminal Procedure — courts catch invented statutes as fast as invented cases.
What does the public record establish about Alamleh c. R.?: Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.
Which source supports this Alamleh c. R. summary?: The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.

Related matters

Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.

Martin v. Hawai'iD. Hawaii · Aug 20, 2024pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: Unidentified United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (2)W.D. Virginia · Jan 23, 2026pro se + fake citations Rivard v. Dept. of CorrectionsVermont SC · Dec 10, 2025pro se + fake citations Susan Elizabeth Duve v. William Charles Forrest, et al.S.D. Texas · Jun 30, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: Unidentified Nady v. Al Sadi, 2026 ONSC 3760Ontario SCJ · Jun 26, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: Unidentified Saini v. Army, Navy & Air Force Veterans in Canada Owls 306Ontario HRT · Jun 15, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: Unidentified

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court

Evidence boundary

Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Pro-se criminal appellant cited a non-existent Code of Criminal Procedure — courts catch invented statutes as fast as invented cases.

Tracked discrepancy record

4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Representations contained references to inexistent case law identified on review by the Court.

Fabricated: Legal Norm | Representations cited an inexistent statute described as the 'Code of Criminal Procedure'.

Fabricated: Case Law | Included inexistent paragraph/pinpoint references to existing judgments (invented paragraph numbers).

Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | Contained inaccurate/misstated references to the judgment on conviction.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Alamleh c. R.?

Why does Alamleh c. R. matter for legal AI risk?

Pro-se criminal appellant cited a non-existent Code of Criminal Procedure — courts catch invented statutes as fast as invented cases.

What does the public record establish about Alamleh c. R.?

Which source supports this Alamleh c. R. summary?

The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.