Obedience to Devices

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-13-4 (obedience to devices). The Court held that the state did not meet its burden of proof in proving the elements of the offense. Pursuant to Rule 17 of the Traffic Tribunal Rules of Procedure, the state is required to prove that the defendant disobeyed an instruction on a specific device by clear and convincing evidence. The trooper’s statements did not relate with “particularity the particular sign or any directional language Appellant allegedly disobeyed.” Consequently, the Court held that the state failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant had disobeyed the signs and dismissed the violation.

State of Rhode Island v. Darrel King, C. A. T10- 0053 (December 8, 2010).pdf