The Defendant appealed a default judgment entered by the trial magistrate, sustaining the charged violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-10-1 (no license on person), § 31-22-22(g) (no seat belt-operator), § 31-21-4 (places where parking or stopping prohibited), § 31-15-12.1 (entering intersection), and § 31-47-9 (operating a motor vehicle without evidence of insurance). The Defendant argued that the Traffic Tribunal did not have subject matter jurisdiction because he identified himself at arraignment as the beneficiary of a trust rather than in his capacity as the operator of the vehicle. The Panel held that because the Defendant was served with the violations in his capacity as operator of the vehicle, the Traffic Tribunal did properly have jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Panel upheld the trial magistrate’s decision.