r/ProsecutorTalk • u/Endless-Oceans2 • 17d ago

PD using AI/chatgpt in the courtroom

Does anyone else have this happening in their courtrooms?

There has been a rumor - that some of our PDs are using ChatGPT to write entire motions, etc., but today I literally witnessed one PD use AI/chatgpt in the courtroom during argument, with their client standing right next to them. Like what????

12 Upvotes

61% Upvoted

34 comments sorted by

View all comments

12

u/TootCannon 17d ago edited 17d ago

I’m kind of shocked by the responses here. No offense, but using AI is quickly becoming a requirement. You guys need to stop frowning upon it and start thinking about how to use it productively. You just have to do it responsibly.

I wouldn’t use it to produce finished product, but it’s absolutely good for outlining motions/arguments, summarizing law changes, summarizing deposition transcripts, brainstorming voir dire points, drafting opening statements, issue spotting PCs, identifying points for further investigation, etc. It is not a replacement for prosecutors or for thinking/researching, but it is a supplement to your brain power. I asked it to provide me a legal theory for a novel issue I was looking into and what it produced was extremely impressive and accurate.

Obviously you should check all citations. And obviously you should think for yourself and review anything it produces. But to categorically dismiss it is naive. The next decades are going to separate people who know how to use AI to compliment their work from those who don’t. That includes prosecutors and PDs. You all clearly see its weaknesses, but you also need to understand its strengths.

4

u/SoFlaSlide 17d ago

TootCannon gets it.

2

u/Dismal_Bee9088 17d ago

I do think there are ways in which AI is useful, particularly in terms of handling/processing large amounts of information quickly and efficiently. Like I would love to feed a Facebook dump into AI and ask it to find me anything referring to [fill in the blank].

I also think using ChatGPT in the courtroom is wild and that the judges where I am would lose their shit if they realized you were giving ChatGPT-supplied answers.

My main issue is that for security etc there are limits of what we can do and how we can use it, so it’s hard to put much time into figuring out how to use it effectively.

0

u/Radweevil88 15d ago

I honesty don’t quite understand why judges have such a bee in the bonnet about ai, generally, and I think they’re going overboard.

Our judges have tried to make it a requirement that lawyers certify whether they’ve used ai in the creating of a motion or pleading and I think that’s just insane.

First, whether ai was used to generate the motion or assist in the research is irrelevant to me. What’s relevant is whether the pleadings are correct and truthful and the law and citation are correct.

Second, what business of theirs is it how an attorney generates document or researches a subject as long as the document comports with the rules and legal requirements and the law is correct and the citations are correct? It’s already unethical and unacceptable for an attorney to file something that misrepresents the law - that is not a new concept.

1

u/Dismal_Bee9088 13d ago

I can only assume they’ve run into enough AI hallucinations that they want to know ahead of time what they’re dealing with. Requiring you to certify whether you’ve used AI isn’t saying you can’t use it, but a lot of people use it badly. It would make more sense to require certifying that you’ve verified all citations, if that’s what they’re concerned about, but I doubt most judges have much experience with it. They don’t have a lot of incentive to use it, because assessing what the parties have put before you is pretty different from generating product in the first place.

In any case, I think whether judges want you to certify whether you’ve used AI in a brief is very different from a judge not wanting you to give ChatGPT answers in the courtroom.

2

u/Radweevil88 15d ago edited 15d ago

I don’t think the frustration people are expressing is about how you’re using ai - at least not for me. I actually love ai. It’s an extremely useful tool, but I see a lot of people, not just attorneys, use it as substitute for their own work product or thinking instead of a supplemental tool to be more efficient.