Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-1 (right half of road), § 31-15-11 (laned roadways), and § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). The District Court held that the defendant was not prejudiced by trial magistrate’s failure to allow the defendant’s counsel to review the arresting officer’s field sobriety test pocket reference guide. Therefore, the Court affirmed the decision of the Appeals Panel.