In a recent development, a federal judge has turned to artificial intelligence (AI) to assist in interpreting a crucial legal term during a sentence appeal case. This innovative approach marks a significant step in the potential integration of AI technologies within the legal system.
Judge Kevin Newsom of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals detailed his AI-assisted research in a concurring opinion on September 6, 2024. The case in question involved Joseph Deleon, who appealed his 11-year prison sentence for an armed robbery of a Florida convenience store.
The crux of the appeal centered on the interpretation of the term "physically restrained" in the context of federal sentencing guidelines. Deleon argued that the enhancement applied to his case was incorrect, as he had not physically touched the cashier during the robbery.
Judge Newsom, a self-described textualist, utilized AI programs, including ChatGPT, to explore the ordinary meaning of the phrase "physically restrained." This approach builds upon his previous suggestion in May 2024 that courts consider using AI to interpret legal texts.
"I increasingly believe that such programs may well serve a valuable auxiliary role as we aim to triangulate ordinary meaning."
The judge's experiment revealed slight variations in the AI-generated responses, which he initially found concerning. However, upon further consideration, he concluded that these variations accurately reflected real-world speech patterns, potentially enhancing the ability to determine ordinary meaning in legal contexts.
This case highlights the growing intersection of AI and legal interpretation. Since the early 2010s, AI has been increasingly utilized in legal research, with commercially available AI-generated legal research tools emerging in the mid-2010s. However, the use of AI in the legal profession has also raised ethical concerns regarding transparency and accountability.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, established in 1981 and based in Atlanta, Georgia, is one of 13 federal appellate courts in the United States. As an intermediate appellate court, it plays a crucial role in interpreting and applying federal law.
The concept of "binding precedent," fundamental to common law legal systems, was a key factor in the court's decision. Despite personal reservations, Judges Robin Rosenbaum and Nancy Abudu concurred with the ruling based on existing 11th Circuit precedent.
This case also touches on broader legal interpretation philosophies. Textualism, which gained prominence in the 1980s, focuses on the ordinary meaning of legal text. Similarly, originalism in constitutional interpretation emerged as a significant approach during the same period.
The U.S. federal sentencing guidelines, created by the United States Sentencing Commission in 1984, continue to play a crucial role in criminal sentencing. The commission, established by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, aims to promote uniformity in federal sentencing.
As AI technologies like ChatGPT, launched in November 2022, continue to evolve, their potential impact on legal interpretation and research remains a topic of ongoing discussion and exploration within the legal community.