Public trackerCorpus refreshed Aug 16, 2026 · Latest decision Aug 13, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesNº 5025505-88.2025.8.24.0000/SC
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

Nº 5025505-88.2025.8.24.0000/SC

TJ San Catarina · Apr 16, 2025

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Misrepresented: Case Law | Petition misstates the holding of RE 1.235.340 (STF), presenting the precedent as supporting the opposite thesis regarding execution after jury verdict. Outcome: Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral. The court found the habeas corpus petition was drafted with clear use of artificial intelligence and contained multiple incorrect or fabricated citations. The petition mischaracterized an STF precedent (RE 1.235.340) and presented several STJ judgments with wrong origins and altered excerpts; one STJ number corresponded to a real process but its quoted passages were false. The tribunal concluded the AI-generated content was misleading and disrespectful, denied the relief, and ordered the file sent to the OAB Ethics Committee for evaluation of the lawyer's conduct.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies fabricated quotes and misrepresented authority and records Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects fabricated quotes and misrepresented authority with Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral in TJ San Catarina. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Misrepresented: Case Law | Petition misstates the holding of RE 1.235.340 (STF), presenting the precedent as supporting the opposite thesis regarding execution after jury verdict. Outcome: Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral. The court found the habeas corpus petition was drafted with clear use of artificial intelligence and contained multiple incorrect or fabricated citations. The petition mischaracterized an STF precedent (RE 1.235.340) and presented several STJ judgments with wrong origins and altered excerpts; one STJ number corresponded to a real process but its quoted passages were false. The tribunal concluded the AI-generated content was misleading and disrespectful, denied the relief, and ordered the file sent to the OAB Ethics Committee for evaluation of the lawyer's conduct.

Operational lesson

This matter connects fabricated quotes and misrepresented authority with Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral in TJ San Catarina. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtTJ San Catarina
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateApr 16, 2025
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeHabeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral
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

Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

  1. Misrepresented: Case Law | Petition misstates the holding of RE 1.235.340 (STF), presenting the precedent as supporting the opposite thesis regarding execution after jury verdict.
  2. False Quotes: Case Law | Excerpts attributed to HC 559.191/PR (STJ) do not reflect what that decision actually decided; quoted passages were created/altered by the AI.
  3. Misrepresented: Case Law | HC 474.832 was cited with an incorrect state of origin (presented as Rio Grande do Sul though it is from the Distrito Federal) and used out of context.
  4. Misrepresented: Case Law | HC 551.268 was cited with an incorrect state of origin (presented as Paraná though it is from São Paulo) and its excerpts do not match the actual decision.
  5. Misrepresented: Case Law | Local TJSC process 5072992-59.2022.8.24.0000 was cited as a habeas corpus decision though the file is a criminal review (revisão criminal), mischaracterizing the precedent.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Nº 5025505-88.2025.8.24.0000/SC?
Misrepresented: Case Law | Petition misstates the holding of RE 1.235.340 (STF), presenting the precedent as supporting the opposite thesis regarding execution after jury verdict. Outcome: Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral. The court found the habeas corpus petition was drafted with clear use of artificial intelligence and contained multiple incorrect or fabricated citations. The petition mischaracterized an STF precedent (RE 1.235.340) and presented several STJ judgments with wrong origins and altered excerpts; one STJ number corresponded to a real process but its quoted passages were false. The tribunal concluded the AI-generated content was misleading and disrespectful, denied the relief, and ordered the file sent to the OAB Ethics Committee for evaluation of the lawyer's conduct.
Why does Nº 5025505-88.2025.8.24.0000/SC matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects fabricated quotes and misrepresented authority with Habeas Corpus request dismissed; Bar Referral in TJ San Catarina. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Nº 5025505-88.2025.8.24.0000/SC?
The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Which source supports this Nº 5025505-88.2025.8.24.0000/SC 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.