Sentencia 000126/2025
TSJ Gran Canaria · Dec 31, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- TSJ Gran Canaria
- Record ID
- sentencia-0001262025-2025-12-31
- Observed outcome
- The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal of the defendant was upheld.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The TSJ Gran Canaria identified that counsel for the appellant submitted a filing containing multiple fabricated case law citations and a non-existent doctrinal report. The court attributed these errors to the lawyer's negligent reliance on content generated by an AI tool, explicitly noting that the cited passages did not exist in the referenced Supreme Court judgments.
False Quotes: Case Law | Cita atribuida a la STS 494/2020 (08-10-2020) con pasajes sobre la idoneidad de explicar la tardanza en la denuncia por trauma; la Sala comprobó que la STS 494/2020 trata del tráfico de drogas y no contiene esos pasajes. || False Quotes: Case Law | Pasaje entrecomillado atribuido a la STS 104/2019 (26-02-2019) que la Sala no halló en las bases de datos; se trata de una cita textual apócrifa atribuida al Tribunal Supremo. || Fabricated: Case Law | Listado de numerosas sentencias del Tribunal Supremo (STS 282/2019; STS 387/2022; STS 845/2016; STS 65/2023; STS 798/2022; STS 381/2019; STS 787/2021) que, según la Sala, son invocadas en el recurso con afirmaciones o pasajes que no se constatan en las bases de datos consultadas. || Fabricated: Doctrinal Work | Mención de un 'Informe del Consejo General del Poder Judicial (CGPJ) sobre la credibilidad del testimonio infantil, 2019' que la Sala declara inexistente en las bases consultadas. || Misrepresented: Other | El tribunal identifica como práctica reiterada la inclusión de citas y extractos no verificables en el escrito de la acusación particular y lo atribuye a la confianza del letrado en lo que 'el algoritmo le propuso', calificando la conducta de negligente.
Spanish panels now name counsel for negligent reliance on 'what the algorithm suggested'; verify every STS quotation.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Criminal
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appeal of an acquittal judgment (Sentencia 000126/2025) issued by the Audiencia Provincial de Santa Cruz de Tenerife.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The court attributed the errors to the lawyer's reliance on what the algorithm suggested.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Do not treat a paid legal-research product as a substitute for source verification.
- Retain a matter-level record of source checks and corrections.