District Court
04/14/2011
Mark Eldridge v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 10-0221 Telephone Call
Telephone Call
Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit). The Court held that the defendant was not deprived of the “right” to a confidential phone call (§ 12-7-20) because the defendant did not have a right to a confidential phone call when charged with only a civil violation. However, the Court reasoned that even if the defendant had a right to a confidential phone call, he was awarded one in this case. Thus, the defendant was not prejudiced in any way, and the Court affirmed the decision of the Appeals Panel.
Mark Eldridge v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 10-0221 (April 14, 2011).pdf
District Court
04/14/2011
Mark Eldridge v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 10-0221 Radar Calibration
Radar/Laser Calibration
Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L 1956 § 31-14-2 (Prima Facie Limits). The Court held that State v. Sprague, 113 R.I. 351, 322 A.2d 23 (1974) did not create a rule that an officer must have a certain amount of experience with radar units. Thus, the officer’s failure to testify to his experience with radar units did not change the result of the case, because the other two elements of Sprague were met. Accordingly, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.
Mark Eldridge v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 10-0221 (April 14, 2011).pdf
District Court
04/14/2011
Mark Eldridge v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 10-0221 Right to an Independent Medical Examination
Right to an Independent Medical Examination
Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit). The Court held that the defendant’s “right” to an independent examination (§ 31-27-3) was not violated. When a defendant refuses a chemical test he or she must be given notice that an independent examination is available; however, the defendant does not need to be given an opportunity to get an examination. In State v. Langella, 650 A.2d 478 (R.I. 1994), the Rhode Island Supreme Court held that a single telephone call made by the defendant, satisfied the duty of the Police Department to provide him with a reasonable opportunity to have an independent medical examination. Here, the defendant was given notice and an opportunity to make a phone call. Thus, the Court affirmed the decision to sustain the refusal charge against the defendant.
Mark Eldridge v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 10-0221 (April 14, 2011).pdf