An Arizona appeals court has overturned a 10-year manslaughter sentence after an AI victim impact video was shown at the defendant’s sentencing, ruling the technology was not reliable and ordering a new hearing in the 2021 shooting death of Christopher Pelkey.
In a decision released Wednesday, the Arizona Court of Appeals said Gabriel Paul Horcasitas must be resentenced because the AI-generated footage improperly presented statements as if they came directly from Pelkey. The panel wrote that the video did not reflect actual events, describing it as a depiction of the victim and his thoughts created from the imaginings of the victim’s sister.
AI victim impact video at center of appeal
At the May 2025 sentencing, Pelkey’s family presented an AI-created video that reassembled his likeness and voice to address the judge. Family members had drawn from voice recordings, videos and photos to build the presentation after struggling with how to convey what Pelkey might have said.
In the video, the AI version of Pelkey expressed forgiveness and regret over the encounter with Horcasitas. Pelkey’s sister said the goal was to humanize her brother for the court and that she anticipated an appeal, though she was disappointed the AI video became the basis for tossing the sentence. A victims’ appeals attorney advised the family that using AI again could prompt another challenge.
Defense attorney Kristen Reller argued that the use of AI evidence violated due process, saying her client had no meaningful way to rebut the video and that it carried undue emotional weight. Attorneys for the family and prosecutors countered that the footage reflected Pelkey’s character and that Arizona law does not require victims to disclose statements in advance, whether written, audio or video.
Court orders resentencing in 2021 road-rage killing
Authorities said Horcasitas, 55, fatally shot Pelkey, 37, during a road-rage confrontation at a Chandler stoplight in November 2021. Pelkey, who was unarmed, was shot after exiting his truck and walking toward Horcasitas’ vehicle. Horcasitas was convicted of manslaughter in Pelkey’s death and of endangerment for a round that struck another vehicle.
It remains unclear whether attorneys or the court knew beforehand that an AI-generated statement would be used. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said prosecutors were aware the family would address the court but not the nature of their presentation.
During the original hearing, the judge remarked that he loved that AI and noted Pelkey’s obvious forgiveness, but did not specify whether the video influenced the sentence. Prosecutors argued the judge did not consider the footage, while the defense maintained he did.
Growing concerns over AI in courtrooms
Courts have increasingly adopted AI for administrative tasks, legal research and public communications, but using AI to generate victim impact statements is new territory. A law professor at Arizona State University warned the practice could encourage broader attempts to introduce AI-generated materials in court, noting the ease of creating persuasive deepfakes and the risk they pose to judges and juries who are accustomed to trusting what they see.
In this case, the appeals court focused on the video’s authenticity and provenance. The defense noted the clip did not disclose who wrote the words voiced by the AI and that no evidence established the statements reflected Pelkey’s actual views. The family’s lawyers pointed out the judge had already heard extensive testimony from relatives and friends and argued that nothing in the video was inflammatory. The defense did not object to the video during the hearing.
The ruling sends the case back for resentencing without the contested AI presentation. Pelkey’s family said they will continue to seek ways to have his voice heard through whatever allowable medium the court permits.
