Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). Defendant made several arguments for granting his appeal, including bias, prejudice, a misapplied standard of review, constitutional violations by the Trial Magistrate, and misinterpreted statutes. The Court reviewed the District Court Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendations pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws 1956 § 8-8-8.1(c)(7), which gives the District Court Judge broad discretion to conduct a de novo review of the record. The Court noted that § 31-41.1-9(d) requires that a judge of a district court not substitute his or her judgment for that of the Appeals Panel as to questions of fact. Furthermore, the Court noted that the Rhode Island Supreme Court has declined to rule on arguments that parties have failed to develop “lucidly” on their own, making several of Defendant’s arguments deemed to be waived. Finally, the Court noted that Defendant had failed to meaningfully discuss or identify any error of law in the Magistrate’s decision in regards to statutory interpretation. Accordingly, the District Court found that the Appeals Panel’s decision was not clearly erroneous, that the burden of proof of clear and convincing evidence had been satisfied, and that the Magistrate’s Findings and recommendations should be adopted as the Decision of the Court.