Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-5 (overtaking on the right).  Defendant claimed that the court improperly allowed the officer to testify as an expert witness because the officer had not been trained as an accident reconstructionist.  The Court held that the trial judge made clear that the officer was not qualified as an expert witness and did not allow him to testify as such.  Further, the officer did not testify as an expert witness because he testified only to his observations of the accident scene, including the location of the vehicles, and the reasonable inferences that he drew from his observations.  Accordingly, the Court sustained the violation.