Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 §31-14-2 (prima facie limits), R.I.G.L. 1956 §31-3-1 (operation of an unregistered vehicle), and R.I.G.L. 1956 §31-47-9 (proof of financial security). The Appeals Panel held that the trial magistrate erred by not requiring the state to offer proof of the defendant’s knowledge that he was operating the vehicle without financial security. Since knowledge is an essential element for proving the violation of § 31-47-9, the Court reversed the trial magistrate’s decision and remanded with instructions to dismiss the violation.