Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-20-9 (“obedience to stop signs”). The Court noted that it lacked the authority to assess witness credibility or to substitute its judgment for that of the hearing judge concerning the weight of the evidence on questions of fact.  Therefore, the Appeals Panel held that its role was doubly limited and could not substitute its judgment for that of the trial judge.  Accordingly, the decision of the trial court was affirmed.