S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   8110
 
                        2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                           I N  A S S E M B L Y
 
                             October 13, 2023
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by M. of A. VANEL -- read once and referred to the Committee
   on Codes
 
 AN ACT to amend the criminal procedure law and the  civil  practice  law
   and  rules,  in  relation  to the admissibility of evidence created or
   processed by artificial intelligence
 
   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section  1.  The  criminal  procedure  law  is amended by adding a new
 section 60.80 to read as follows:
 § 60.80 RULES OF EVIDENCE; ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE  CREATED  OR  PROC-
           ESSED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.
   1.  EVIDENCE  CREATED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
 SHALL NOT BE RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE IN A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING UNLESS  THE
 EVIDENCE  IS  SUBSTANTIALLY  SUPPORTED  BY  INDEPENDENT  AND  ADMISSIBLE
 EVIDENCE AND THE PROPONENT OF THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES  THE  RELIABILITY
 AND  ACCURACY  OF  THE  SPECIFIC  USE  OF THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN
 CREATING THE EVIDENCE.
   2. EVIDENCE PROCESSED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
 SHALL NOT BE RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE IN A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING UNLESS  THE
 PROPONENT  OF  THE  EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES THE RELIABILITY AND ACCURACY OF
 THE SPECIFIC USE  OF  THE  ARTIFICIAL  INTELLIGENCE  IN  PROCESSING  THE
 EVIDENCE.
   3.  EVIDENCE  IS  CREATED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLI-
 GENCE WHERE THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PRODUCES  NEW  INFORMATION  FROM
 EXISTING  INFORMATION  NOT  PRESENT  IN OR REASONABLY DEDUCIBLE FROM THE
 EXISTING INFORMATION.
   4. EVIDENCE IS PROCESSED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY ARTIFICIAL  INTELLI-
 GENCE  WHERE THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PRODUCES A CONCLUSION BASED OFF
 OF ITS ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION, OR TRANSFORMATION OF EXISTING  INFORMA-
 TION WHERE SUCH CONCLUSION IS NOT REASONABLY DEDUCIBLE FROM THE EXISTING
 INFORMATION.
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD13089-01-3
              

 A. 8110                             2
 
   5.  EVIDENCE IS NOT REASONABLY DEDUCIBLE FROM THE EXISTING INFORMATION
 WHERE THE RELIABILITY OR ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION CREATED OR  CONCLU-
 SION  DRAWN FROM THE EXISTING INFORMATION WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY COMPRO-
 MISED WITHOUT THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE  AS  A  RESULT  OF  THE
 COMPLEXITY, UNCERTAINTY, OR SUBTLETY OF THE INFORMATION.
   6.  EVIDENCE  IS SUBSTANTIALLY SUPPORTED BY INDEPENDENT AND ADMISSIBLE
 EVIDENCE WHERE:
   (A) THE INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE IS SEPARATE FROM, AND NOT  DERIVED  FROM,
 THE  ARTIFICIAL  INTELLIGENCE  THAT  GENERATED  THE ARTIFICIALLY CREATED
 EVIDENCE;
   (B) THE INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE UNDER THE EXISTING RULES OF
 EVIDENCE;
   (C) THE INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE BEARS A CLOSE AND  SIGNIFICANT  RELATION-
 SHIP TO THE ARTIFICIALLY CREATED EVIDENCE IN SUCH A MANNER THAT IT REIN-
 FORCES  OR  CORROBORATES  THE  INFORMATION CREATED FROM THE ARTIFICIALLY
 CREATED EVIDENCE.
   7. THE RELIABILITY AND ACCURACY OF THE SPECIFIC USE OF THE  ARTIFICIAL
 INTELLIGENCE  IN CREATING OR PROCESSING THE EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENT WHERE
 THE PROPONENT OF THE EVIDENCE HAS A QUALIFIED EXPERT  TESTIFY  AND  SUCH
 TESTIMONY IS SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT:
   (A) THE SPECIFIC USE OF THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HAS BEEN VALIDATED
 THROUGH  RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC OR TECHNICAL TESTING, DEMONSTRATING THAT IT
 CONSISTENTLY PRODUCES ACCURATE AND RELIABLE RESULTS IN  VARIED  ENVIRON-
 MENTS;
   (B)  THE  ARTIFICIAL  INTELLIGENCE  HAS  BEEN  SUBJECTED TO TESTING OR
 APPLICATION IN ENVIRONMENTS THAT ARE SIMILAR OR ANALOGOUS TO THE SPECIF-
 IC CONTEXT IN WHICH IT IS BEING USED IN THE PROCEEDING AND SUCH  TESTING
 OR APPLICATION PRODUCED ACCURATE AND RELIABLE RESULTS;
   (C)  THE  ARTIFICIAL  INTELLIGENCE HAS NOT BEEN SUBJECTED TO ANY VARI-
 ABLES THAT, BASED ON SCIENTIFIC OR TECHNICAL TESTING OF THE SYSTEM, HAVE
 A SUBSTANTIAL PROBABILITY OF CAUSING A MATERIALLY INACCURATE OR  UNRELI-
 ABLE  RESULT. IN ASSESSING THE PROBABILITY, THE COURT SHALL CONSIDER THE
 WEIGHT OF THE ARTIFICIALLY CREATED EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO  OTHER  ADMITTED
 EVIDENCE.
   8.  WHERE  EXPERT  TESTIMONY  WOULD  INCLUDE TRADE SECRETS, PRIVILEGED
 GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, OR INFORMATION ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT  TECHNIQUES
 THAT, IF DISCLOSED, WOULD UNDULY COMPROMISE THEIR ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY
 USE  THEIR  SYSTEMS  FOR  THEIR  INTENDED  PURPOSE,  THE  COURT,  IN ITS
 DISCRETION, MAY IMPOSE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO PROTECT SUCH INFORMATION.
   § 2. The civil practice law and rules  is  amended  by  adding  a  new
 section 4551 to read as follows:
   §  4551. RULES OF EVIDENCE; ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE CREATED OR PROC-
 ESSED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.  (A) EVIDENCE CREATED, IN WHOLE OR  IN
 PART,  BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MAY NOT BE RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE IN A
 CIVIL PROCEEDING UNLESS THE EVIDENCE IS SUBSTANTIALLY SUPPORTED BY INDE-
 PENDENT AND ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE AND THE PROPONENT OF THE EVIDENCE ESTAB-
 LISHES THE RELIABILITY AND ACCURACY OF THE SPECIFIC USE OF  THE  ARTIFI-
 CIAL INTELLIGENCE IN CREATING THE EVIDENCE.
   (B)  EVIDENCE  PROCESSED,  IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLI-
 GENCE MAY NOT BE RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE IN A CIVIL PROCEEDING UNLESS THE
 PROPONENT OF THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES THE RELIABILITY  AND  ACCURACY  OF
 THE  SPECIFIC  USE  OF  THE  ARTIFICIAL  INTELLIGENCE  IN PROCESSING THE
 EVIDENCE.
   (C) EVIDENCE IS CREATED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY  ARTIFICIAL  INTELLI-
 GENCE  WHERE  THE  ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PRODUCES NEW INFORMATION FROM
 A. 8110                             3
 
 EXISTING INFORMATION NOT PRESENT IN OR  REASONABLY  DEDUCIBLE  FROM  THE
 EXISTING INFORMATION.
   (D) EVIDENCE IS PROCESSED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLI-
 GENCE  WHERE THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PRODUCES A CONCLUSION BASED OFF
 OF ITS ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION, OR TRANSFORMATION OF EXISTING  INFORMA-
 TION WHERE SUCH CONCLUSION IS NOT REASONABLY DEDUCIBLE FROM THE EXISTING
 INFORMATION.
   (E) EVIDENCE IS NOT REASONABLY DEDUCIBLE FROM THE EXISTING INFORMATION
 WHERE  THE RELIABILITY OR ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION CREATED OR CONCLU-
 SION DRAWN FROM THE EXISTING INFORMATION WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY  COMPRO-
 MISED  WITHOUT  THE  USE  OF  ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AS A RESULT OF THE
 COMPLEXITY, UNCERTAINTY, OR SUBTLETY OF THE INFORMATION.
   (F) EVIDENCE IS SUBSTANTIALLY SUPPORTED BY INDEPENDENT AND  ADMISSIBLE
 EVIDENCE WHERE:
   1.  THE  INDEPENDENT  EVIDENCE IS SEPARATE FROM, AND NOT DERIVED FROM,
 THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE  THAT  GENERATED  THE  ARTIFICIALLY  CREATED
 EVIDENCE;
   2.  THE INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE UNDER THE EXISTING RULES OF
 EVIDENCE;
   3. THE INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE BEARS A CLOSE AND SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP
 TO THE ARTIFICIALLY CREATED EVIDENCE IN SUCH A MANNER THAT IT REINFORCES
 OR CORROBORATES THE INFORMATION CREATED FROM  THE  ARTIFICIALLY  CREATED
 EVIDENCE.
   (G) THE RELIABILITY AND ACCURACY OF THE SPECIFIC USE OF THE ARTIFICIAL
 INTELLIGENCE  IN CREATING OR PROCESSING THE EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENT WHERE
 THE PROPONENT OF THE EVIDENCE HAS A QUALIFIED EXPERT  TESTIFY  AND  SUCH
 TESTIMONY IS SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT:
   1.  THE SPECIFIC USE OF THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HAS BEEN VALIDATED
 THROUGH RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC OR TECHNICAL TESTING, DEMONSTRATING THAT  IT
 CONSISTENTLY  PRODUCES  ACCURATE AND RELIABLE RESULTS IN VARIED ENVIRON-
 MENTS;
   2. THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO TESTING OR APPLI-
 CATION IN ENVIRONMENTS THAT ARE SIMILAR OR  ANALOGOUS  TO  THE  SPECIFIC
 CONTEXT  IN WHICH IT IS BEING USED IN THE PROCEEDING AND SUCH TESTING OR
 APPLICATION PRODUCED ACCURATE AND RELIABLE RESULTS;
   3. THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HAS NOT BEEN SUBJECTED TO ANY VARIABLES
 THAT, BASED ON SCIENTIFIC OR TECHNICAL TESTING OF  THE  SYSTEM,  HAVE  A
 SUBSTANTIAL PROBABILITY OF CAUSING A MATERIALLY INACCURATE OR UNRELIABLE
 RESULT.  IN  ASSESSING  THE  PROBABILITY,  THE  COURT SHALL CONSIDER THE
 WEIGHT OF THE ARTIFICIALLY CREATED EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO  OTHER  ADMITTED
 EVIDENCE.
   (H)  WHERE  EXPERT  TESTIMONY  WOULD INCLUDE TRADE SECRETS, PRIVILEGED
 GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, OR INFORMATION ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT  TECHNIQUES
 THAT, IF DISCLOSED, WOULD UNDULY COMPROMISE THEIR ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY
 USE  THEIR  SYSTEMS  FOR  THEIR  INTENDED  PURPOSE,  THE  COURT,  IN ITS
 DISCRETION, MAY IMPOSE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO PROTECT SUCH INFORMATION.
   § 3. This act shall take effect on the first of January next  succeed-
 ing the date on which it shall have become a law.