Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). The Defendant argued that she was deprived of her due process right to an impartial fact finder because the trial magistrate assisted the prosecution to prove an essential element of the violation. Specifically, the trial magistrate advised counsel for the State that the “Rights for Use at the Station” form had not been introduced into evidence, which prompted counsel to enter the form. The Panel explained that a dismissal based on impartial fact finder is warranted when the actions of the magistrate undermine the fundamental fairness required by due process and, even though a citizen is guaranteed an impartial fact finder, there is no evidence here that the trial magistrate attempted to establish proof to support the position of either party. Here, the Panel found that the trial magistrate did not exceed his permissible scope of authority because his participation in the proceeding was for the limited purpose of ensuring that it proceeded in an orderly and expeditious fashion. Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violation.