Credibility

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits). Defendant claimed that the decision should be set aside because the judge erred in crediting the testimony of the citing officer. Specifically, the Defendant argued that because the Officer wrote the wrong date on the citation, his testimony should be discredited.  The Panel explained it will not substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact on issues of credibility.  Here, the factual finding by the trial judge that the defendant was speeding was not clearly erroneous because it was fully supported by the record where the officer testified to the defendant’s speed, the recent calibration of the radar device, and his training in the use of radar devices.  The Panel explained that an error or omission will not be grounds for reversal unless the error misleads the defendant to his or her prejudice.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the violation against the defendant.

City of Woonsocket v. R. Michelle Pierre, C.A. No. T12-0075 (May 9, 2013).pdf