The state appealed the decision of the trial judge dismissing the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test) in favor of the defendant. The Court held that the trial judge erred when he dismissed the violation because the defendant suffered no prejudice by the officer’s presence when he attempted to contact his lawyer. Since the defendant was not able to reach his attorney and the defendant only offered a myriad of hypothetical situations relying on “vague, speculative, or conclusory allegations[,]” he failed “[t]o establish actual prejudice[.]” The state’s appeal was granted and the matter was remanded for further proceedings. See Commonwealth v. Scher, 803 A.2d 1204, 1238 (P.A. 2002) (citing, United States v. Crouch, 84 F.3d 1497, 1515 (5th Cir. 1996)).