Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the charged violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-16-1 (care in starting from stop), and § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to chemical test).  Defendant argued that the trial magistrate erred in sustaining the refusal charge when the Officer read the “rights for use at the scene” at the Woonsocket Police Department rather than at the scene of the initial traffic stop.  The Officer testified that due to heavy traffic, numerous pedestrians, narrowed roads due to snow banks and sidewalks covered in ice and snow, he determined it would not be safe to conduct a field sobriety test at the scene.  Instead, the Officer placed the Defendant under arrest for failing to produce a drivers license and for obstruction in violation of §§ 31-10-27 and 11-32-1.  Thereafter, the Officer drove a quarter mile away to the police station where he conducted field sobriety tests, part of which the Defendant failed, at which point the Officer read the rights for use at the scene and placed the Defendant under arrest for suspicion of DUI.  The Panel held that, because the scene of the DUI investigation shifted to the police station, the Officer read the Defendant his rights for use at the scene immediately after the arrest, as required by the statute.  The Panel also explained that the Defendant did not provide any evidence demonstrating prejudice by the timing of the reading of his rights.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violations. 

Judge Almeida dissented, writing that because the Officer had probable cause to arrest the Defendant for DUI at the scene of the traffic stop, the Officer was obligated to arrest and read the Defendant his rights for use at the scene immediately, the delay of which constituted prejudice to the Defendant.