Attorney Training: Dismissal Pathways Library
Attorney Training: Dismissal Pathways Library
Attorney Training: Dismissal Pathways Library
Attorney Training: Dismissal Pathways Library
Attorney Training: Dismissal Pathways Library
Attorney Training: Dismissal Pathways Library

Attorney Training: Dismissal Pathways Library

$800

Attorney training on the dismissal pathways library in the IMC Machine's Dismissal Engine: Article 39.14, Brady, Miranda, suppression, and statutory dismissal.

Price: $800 one-time.

Friday afternoon. A defense attorney sits down for training on dismissal pathways: what motions to consider, what the Dismissal Engine drafts for attorney review, and how the attorney-approval gate keeps every filing in the attorney's hands.

What it is

A 2.0-hour attorney training session on the dismissal pathways library: Article 39.14 discovery motions, Brady motions, Miranda challenges, suppression motions, and statutory dismissal pathways. The IMC Machine's motion-drafting workflow is demonstrated for each pathway alongside the underlying statutory and case-law analysis. CLE credit and reporting are included only when approval and reporting are confirmed in the signed order form.

What's in it

  • 2.0-hour training session
  • Live or recorded session
  • Workbook with motion templates for each dismissal pathway
  • Demo of motion-drafting in the Dismissal Engine for each pathway
  • Q&A with the instructor
  • Certificate of completion provided to attendee; State Bar reporting only when confirmed in writing

Who it's for

Criminal-defense attorneys handling Texas matters. Built for the attorney who wants a working command of the major dismissal pathways.

When to pick this one

Pick this for comprehensive dismissal-pathways training. Often follows Attorney Training: Evidence Orchestrator Workflow and the AI-ethics training.

How automation is used

The accepted order identifies the IMC Machine workflows, integrations, and automations included. Automation can assist repetitive work and documented handoffs; a person remains responsible for review and approval.

Deposit reserves your place. Studio acceptance precedes work; the deposit applies to your project or refunds in full. Prices exclude applicable tax.

Order details: Price, scope, timing, and any qualification requirements are stated on this page and confirmed at checkout.

Texas attorneys and the rules for AI

Texas permits a licensed attorney to use generative AI in practice, and it places the responsibility for that use squarely on the attorney. In Opinion 705 (February 2025), the State Bar of Texas set out four duties that apply to every matter that touches AI: competence, confidentiality, verification, and fair billing. Competence requires the attorney to understand how the technology works, including the limitations of each model and the way the platform routes between them; the attorney does not need to be an engineer, but does need to know enough to recognize when the tool is wrong. Confidentiality requires that client information be processed only through systems whose terms preclude redistribution and preclude training on client content without consent.

Verification requires that no AI output be relied on in client representation or in a court filing without independent review by the licensed attorney. This is the duty that has produced sanctions, and Texas attorneys have already been disciplined for filing unverified, AI-invented citations. Fair billing requires that any efficiency gained be passed to the client.

The IMC Machine is built around these duties. Every draft, worksheet, transcript, and dismissal pathway it produces is a proposal, not a filing: nothing files automatically, and the attorney of record signs and approves every release. Each court-facing draft is routed for independent review across OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude, and Google’s Gemini before it reaches the attorney, and every AI invocation is named and timestamped in the platform’s audit log.

When AI output is offered into evidence rather than used as work product, it must satisfy authentication under Texas Rule of Evidence 901, and the emerging Federal Rule of Evidence 707 will add reliability gatekeeping; the platform records model identity, configuration, and the human review pass so counsel can lay that foundation. The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, in force since January 1, 2026, is a civil framework that does not reach ordinary attorney work product. No statewide Texas rule requires disclosure of AI use in court filings, but federal districts and individual judges differ, so counsel should consult each judge’s standing order before filing. AI can make mistakes. The tool is permitted; the judgment, the verification, and the signature remain the attorney’s, and that responsibility is not transferable.