The family of a road rage victim in Arizona used his likeness to create a posthumous AI video played at his killer’s sentencing last year. Now, an appeals court has vacated the sentence, calling the decision to allow the video a “fundamental error.”

Last May, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Todd Lang gave Gabriel Paul Horcasitas the maximum sentence for the fatal shooting of Christopher Pelkey, 37, on Nov. 13, 2021. Horcasitas, 54, was convicted of manslaughter and endangerment.

The 10 1/2-year sentence was handed down after an AI-generated video was played in court in which a replica of Pelkey voiced “forgiveness” for Horcasitas.

On Wednesday, the Arizona Court of Appeals in Phoenix ordered a resentencing, writing that the video “clearly impacted the sentencing judge, who said he ‘loved’ the video and felt it ‘was genuine.’”

“On this record, the judge’s consideration of the AI video so prejudiced Horcasitas as to render the sentencing procedure fundamentally unfair,” the appellate judges stated. “Accordingly, we vacate the sentence for manslaughter and remand for resentencing.”

NBC News has reached out to lawyers for Horcasitas and for Pelkey’s family for comment.

At the 2025 sentencing, the AI version of Pelkey, created by his sister Stacey Wales, appeared to ask the judge for leniency.

“To Gabriel Horcasitas, the man who shot me: It is a shame we encountered each other that day in those circumstances,” the artificial version of Pelkey said. “In another life, we probably could have been friends. I believe in forgiveness.”

Lang appeared to be moved by the presentation.

“I loved that AI. Thank you for that, and as angry as you are and justifiably angry as the family is, I heard the forgiveness and I know Mr. Horcasitas appreciated it, but so did I,” Lang said at the hearing.

He added that he felt the video was “genuine, that his obvious forgiveness of Mr. Horcasitas reflects the character I heard about [Pelkey] today.”

“But it also says something about the family because you told me how angry you were and you demanded the maximum sentence, and even though that’s what you wanted you allowed [Pelkey] to speak from his heart as you saw it,” Lang said. “I didn’t hear him asking for the maximum sentence.”

The defense had requested the lowest possible sentence, but Lang imposed the maximum, saying that despite Horcasitas’ “remorse” and otherwise “lawful life,” the loss described by Pelkey’s family “could not be more profound.”

According to the appeals court, Horcasitas argued he was denied due process because the sentencing court heard and relied on the AI video. The state countered that the video reflected what Pelkey’s sister believed he “would have said” and that it was “consistent” with Pelkey’s written account of his beliefs and values.

But the appeals court found the video “crossed that line” from permissible to unduly prejudicial, noting that it “does not reflect actual events.”

“Indeed, rather than documenting an event or recording a particular moment,” it stated, “the AI video presents a depiction of the victim and his thoughts created from the imaginings of the victim’s sister.”