Procedure

The Defendant appealed the Pawtucket Municipal Court’s decision sustaining the charged violation of G.L. 1956 §31-14-2(a) (prima facie limits). At the close of the Officer’s trial testimony the trial judge independently asked the Officer about calibrating the radar unit and whether the Officer was properly trained to operate the radar unit.  Such questioning in hopes of meeting the requirements established under State v. Sprauge, 322 A.2d 36 (R.I. 1974), violates the Supreme Court’s holding in State v. Nelson, 982 A.2d 602, 615 (R.I. 2009), that a trial judge may ask questions only for clarification, and not to elicit substantive evidence. Therefore, the Panel found that the trial judge exceeded her boundaries and her decision was made from unlawful procedure. The Panel granted the appeal and dismissed the violation.

City of Pawtucket v. Mary E. Woll, C.A. No. M14-0022 (January 16, 2016).pdf

Procedure

The Defendant appealed the Pawtucket Municipal Court’s decision sustaining the charged violation of G.L. 1956 §31-14-2(a) (prima facie limits).  The Defendant argued on appeal that the trial judge’s decision contained an error of law because the trial judge interrupted the Defendant’s cross-examination of the Officer.  The Appeals Panel, noting that the Rhode Island Rules of Evidence allow a court and or judge to maintain and exercise control over witness interrogation held that the trial judge was within her bounds to interrupt the cross-examination. The Panel granted the appeal on other grounds and dismissed the violation.

City of Pawtucket v. Mary E. Woll, C.A. No. M14-0022 (January 16, 2016).pdf