Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit). Defendant argued that the officer failed to testify at trial, by more than a bare assertion, which specific rights were read to him at the scene before he refused to submit, and further, that the rights for use card was not submitted into evidence. The Court held that in order to satisfy the requirements of § 31-27-3, the actual rights for use at the scene card must be admitted into evidence unless the officer is capable of reciting the language of the card from memory. Here, the requirements of §31-27-3 were not fulfilled because the card was not submitted and the officer made only a bare assertion that he had read the defendant the rights for use card at the scene. Accordingly, the Court held that the decision of the trial judge was clearly erroneous and dismissed the charge against the defendant.