Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits). The defendant alleged that the traffic stop was only a pretext to stop him.  The Court held that because it did not observed the testimony of the defendant or the officers regarding the reason for the traffic stop, it was limited to review the record presented and must defer to the trier of fact on determinations of credibility pursuant to R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-41.8(f). The Court went on to note that even if police had a dual motive for the stop, that did not make it fatally pretextual. The officer’s testimony reflected all the elements necessary to sustain the charge . Accordingly, because the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record did not show a clear error of law, the Court affirmed trial judge’s decision and sustained the violation.