Airport Regulations

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-12-12 (power of local authorities), and Rhode Island Airport Corporation Regulation 2.2.2 (permitted use at the airport”). The Court held that because the defendant failed to raise the issue of federal anti-trust laws violation at trial he had waived that defense under the ‘raise-or-waive’ rule set out by the R.I. Supreme Court in Pollard v. Acer Group, 870 A.2d 429 (R.I. 2005) (quoting State v. Gatone, 698 A.2d 230, 242 (R.I. 1997)). Accordingly, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.

State of Rhode Island v. Francisco Espinal, C.A. T10-0049 (October 13, 2010)..pdf

Airport Regulations

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-12-12 (power of local authorities) and Rhode Island Airport Corporation Regulation 2.2.2 (permitted use at the airport). The Court held that the defendant’s argument that the Airport Corporation had no authority to enforce 2.2.2 because the rule is pre-empted by the Public Utilities Commission was waived because the defendant provided only a “passing reference to an argument and it is insufficient to merit appellate review.” Tondreault v. Tondreault, 966 A.2d 654, 664 (2008) (quoting DeAngelis v. DeAngelis, 923 A.2d 1274, 1282 n. 11 (R.I. 2007)). Further, the Court held that, as the defendant was an unauthorized driver within the meaning of the statute and he was not (a) “transporting a customer to the airport; or (b) previously summoned by a customer prior to entry,” the fact that he was not engaged in commercial activity during his travel through the short-term parking lot did not render the statute inapplicable to him. Accordingly, the violation was sustained.

State of Rhode Island v. Francisco Espinal, C.A. T10-0049 (October 13, 2010)..pdf