Defendant appealed the judgment of the Appeals Panel affirming the trial magistrate’s verdict sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). In a case in which the Defendant blew into the machine and the machine registered a “deficient sample,” the Defendant argued that the State failed to meet its burden of proving that the machine had been certified and calibrated because the Trooper was unable to recall the machine’s serial number. The Court held that because there was only one machine at the barracks and the machine was found to be in good working order days before, the trial magistrate’s did not err in finding that the State proved the machine was in good working order. Accordingly, the Court upheld the decision to sustain the violation.