HomeCasesState v. Garrett

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

State v. Garrett

CC Wisconsin · Feb 6, 2026

WI / stateEditorial impact: lowfake citationstrial

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Case dismissed without prejudice. From the docket record: "Court sanctions DA Solis by striking the State's Response for failure to disclose AI, using hallucinated and false citations and for admitting failure to disclose AI. Court grants Motion to Dismiss for defective bind-over, in its entirety, without prejudice. "

Why the court cared: Fabricated: Case Law
Why it matters now: A prosecutor who hides AI use and files fake citations loses the case; mandate written AI disclosure on every criminal filing.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

A prosecutor who hides AI use and files fake citations loses the case; mandate written AI disclosure on every criminal filing.

Record details

WisconsinSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtCC Wisconsin

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit7th Circuit

DateFeb 6, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeProsecutor

OutcomeCase dismissed without prejudice

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Case dismissed without prejudice

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law

Questions this record answers

What happened in State v. Garrett?: Fabricated: Case Law Outcome: Case dismissed without prejudice. From the docket record: "Court sanctions DA Solis by striking the State's Response for failure to disclose AI, using hallucinated and false citations and for admitting failure to disclose AI. Court grants Motion to Dismiss for defective bind-over, in its entirety, without prejudice. "
Why does State v. Garrett matter for legal AI risk?: A prosecutor who hides AI use and files fake citations loses the case; mandate written AI disclosure on every criminal filing.
What does the public record establish about State v. Garrett?: 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 State v. Garrett summary?: The recorded source is wcca.wicourts.gov. It is classified as official court or government source; 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.

Xinyue Hippe v. Retention Brands, LLCE.D. Wisconsin · Jun 23, 2026same jurisdiction · fake citations + trial William Louis Armstrong, III v. City of MilwaukeeE.D. Wisconsin · May 11, 2026same jurisdiction · fake citations + trial SEC v. Joseph Nantomah et al.E.D. Wisconsin · Jan 30, 2026same jurisdiction · fake citations + trial Gerou v. George, Whitten, and United StatesE.D. Wisconsin · Dec 18, 2025same jurisdiction · fake citations + trial Alaya Coleman v. RPF-Somers Investors, LLC, et al.E.D. Wisconsin · Nov 4, 2025same jurisdiction · fake citations + trial Todd E. Glass v. Foley & Lardner LLPW.D. Wisconsin · Nov 4, 2025same jurisdiction · fake citations + trial

Linked evidence record

wcca.wicourts.gov

Official court or government source
The recorded link is hosted by a court or government domain.

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 Open jurisdiction map

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

A prosecutor who hides AI use and files fake citations loses the case; mandate written AI disclosure on every criminal filing.

Record details

WisconsinSingle-state evidence scope

Jurisdiction contextThe state marker is derived from the structured case record.

CourtCC Wisconsin

Jurisdictionstate

Circuit7th Circuit

DateFeb 6, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeProsecutor

OutcomeCase dismissed without prejudice

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Questions this record answers

What happened in State v. Garrett?

Why does State v. Garrett matter for legal AI risk?

A prosecutor who hides AI use and files fake citations loses the case; mandate written AI disclosure on every criminal filing.

What does the public record establish about State v. Garrett?

Which source supports this State v. Garrett summary?

The recorded source is wcca.wicourts.gov. It is classified as official court or government source; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.