HomeCasesUnited States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1)

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1)

W.D. Virginia · Aug 27, 2025

VA / federalEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotescriminal

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Doctrinal Work | DeBaere cited a non-existent provision of the Guide to Judiciary Policy (Vol. 8, Pt. E, § 220.40) and quoted language that the court determined does not exist; court found the quotation fabricated and provided no basis for disclosure. Outcome: Warning.

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Warning; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in W.D. Virginia, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in W.D. Virginia, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

VirginiaSingle-state evidence scope

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

CourtW.D. Virginia

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit4th Circuit

DateAug 27, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

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

Warning

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: Doctrinal Work | DeBaere cited a non-existent provision of the Guide to Judiciary Policy (Vol. 8, Pt. E, § 220.40) and quoted language that the court determined does not exist; court found the quotation fabricated and provided no basis for disclosure.
Fabricated: Case Law | DeBaere relied on a fabricated Sixth Circuit decision cited as United States v. Zai, 939 F.3d 740, 746 (6th Cir. 2019), including a quoted passage that the court determined was invented; court rejected the authority as non-existent/misleading.
Fabricated: Case Law | DeBaere cited United States v. Parisi, 363 F. Supp. 3d 281 (W.D.N.Y. 2019) as support for early termination; the court determined that citation is fabricated and provides no support.
Fabricated: Case Law | The defendant's filings contained numerous additional fabricated or mischaracterized cases and quotations (the brief contained over 70 citations the court described as fabricated or mischaracterized); the court emphasized the defendant's responsibility to verify authorities.

Questions this record answers

What happened in United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1)?: Fabricated: Doctrinal Work | DeBaere cited a non-existent provision of the Guide to Judiciary Policy (Vol. 8, Pt. E, § 220.40) and quoted language that the court determined does not exist; court found the quotation fabricated and provided no basis for disclosure. Outcome: Warning.
Why does United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1) matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Warning in W.D. Virginia, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1)?: 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 United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1) 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.

United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (2)W.D. Virginia · Jan 23, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Suiter v. GM - General Motors, LLCW.D. Virginia · Mar 12, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Gavin Simpson v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLCW.D. Virginia · Dec 19, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Scott M. Boger v. City of Harrisonburg, Virginia, et al.W.D. Virginia · Dec 9, 2025same court · pro se + fake citations Sherwood v. County of Botetourt, Virginia, et al.W.D. Virginia · May 20, 2026same court · fake citations + fabricated quotes Gail Fung v. Liberty UniversityW.D. Virginia · Feb 24, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations

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 Open jurisdiction map

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Record details

VirginiaSingle-state evidence scope

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

CourtW.D. Virginia

Jurisdictionfederal

Circuit4th Circuit

DateAug 27, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeWarning

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | DeBaere relied on a fabricated Sixth Circuit decision cited as United States v. Zai, 939 F.3d 740, 746 (6th Cir. 2019), including a quoted passage that the court determined was invented; court rejected the authority as non-existent/misleading.

Fabricated: Case Law | DeBaere cited United States v. Parisi, 363 F. Supp. 3d 281 (W.D.N.Y. 2019) as support for early termination; the court determined that citation is fabricated and provides no support.

Fabricated: Case Law | The defendant's filings contained numerous additional fabricated or mischaracterized cases and quotations (the brief contained over 70 citations the court described as fabricated or mischaracterized); the court emphasized the defendant's responsibility to verify authorities.

Questions this record answers

What happened in United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1)?

Why does United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1) matter for legal AI risk?

What does the public record establish about United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1)?

Which source supports this United States v. Michael Shane DeBaere (1) 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.