Right to Counsel

Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). The Court held that the defendant was not prejudiced by her inability to reach her attorney where the defendant was afforded the opportunity to make a phone call because there is no right to counsel regarding the decision of whether to refuse or agree to submit to a chemical test. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the charge against the defendant.Julie Longtin Sinapi v. RITT, A.A. No 06-92 (February 7, 2007).pdf