Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-24-1 (times when lights are required). The Court held that the trial judge properly took judicial notice that the time at which the offense occurred (1:30a.m.) was between sunset and sunrise. Thus, the Court affirmed the decision sustaining the violation against the defendant.
Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-24-1 (times when lights are required). The Court held that the failure to sign the back of the traffic citation does not preclude the Court from sustaining the charge against the defendant. Accordingly, the Court sustained the charge against defendant.
Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-24-1 (times when lights are required). The Court held that the defendant cited no case law requiring that a defendant be identified in court in a civil action in order for a charge to be sustained. Furthermore, the defendant’s counsel identified him as the defendant. Thus, the Court affirmed the decision sustaining the charge against the defendant.