Parties to an Offense

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-9 (parties to offense). Here, a hit-and-run collision occurred and a motorist testified at trial that the Defendant’s vehicle matched the description of the hit-and-run vehicle. The motorist did not see who was operating the vehicle at the time. When the Officer spoke to the Defendant, the Defendant denied operating the car on the date in question and told the Officer that the damage to the Defendant’s car was caused by another accident the night before. The trial magistrate found the Defendant guilty under § 31-27-9 (parties to offense), but he found the Defendant not guilty under § 31-26-3 (duty to give information and render aid) because there was no evidence as to who was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident. The Appeals Panel held that § 31-27-9 provides for liability when a defendant is a party to another substantive offense, but does not in and of itself serve as grounds for the imposition of civil liability. The Court held that because the trial magistrate found the defendant guilty under § 31-27-9 (parties to an offense), but not under another substantive offense of the motor vehicle code to which she was charged with being a party, the trial magistrate’s decision constituted an error of law. Accordingly, the Court reversed the trial magistrate and remanded with instructions to dismiss the violation.

City of Cranston v. Helen Pirri, No. T15-0017 (March 11, 2016).pdf