Constitutional Issues

Defendant appealed the decision of the Trial Judge sustaining a charged violation of R.I. Gen. Laws 1956 §31-20-12 (School Bus Violation). Defendant argued that the Trial Judge prevented her from having a fair trial because he did not allow her to answer questions or make statements. The Appeals Panel, however, noted that Defendant had received proper notice by receiving a summons with the correct date and time of the hearing, Defendant was given an opportunity to present evidence before the Trial Judge, and that Defendant was allowed to present a defense and cross-examine witnesses. Furthermore, Defendant chose not to cross-examine the bus driver on her testimony, which formed the basis for the Trial Judge’s decision to sustain the charge. As a result, the Appeals Panel found that Defendant was given a fair trial. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel denied Defendant’s Appeal and upheld the charged violation.

State of Rhode Island v. Amanda Carignan, No. T16-0016 (February 8, 2018).pdf