Appeals Panel
07/27/2016
State of Rhode Island v. Bryan E. Menge, No. T15-0036 (July 27, 2016)
Right to an Independent Medical Examination
Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (“refusal to submit to chemical test”). Defendant argued that the officer did not give the defendant an immediate opportunity to contact and be examined by a physician of his choosing. Defendant was read his rights at the scene and then arrived at the station 23 minutes later. In State v. Poole, 197 A.2d 163 (R.I. 1964), the court held that a forty-five minute time delay between the defendant being notified of his right to be examined by a physician and the defendant’s opportunity to contact a physician did not violate the immediacy requirement. Accordingly, the decision of the trial court was affirmed.
State of Rhode Island v. Bryan E. Menge, No. T15-0036 (July 27, 2016).pdf
Appeals Panel
07/27/2016
State of Rhode Island v. Bryan E. Menge, No. T15-0036 (July 27, 2016)
Constitutional Issues
Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (“refusal to submit to chemical test”). Defendant argued that the officer did not have a right to be on the premises. Defendant was in the parking lot of a bar with his vehicle running and the keys in the ignition. The officer had responded to a call from the bar owner of a suspicious vehicle parked in the parking lot after the bar was closed. In State v. Cook, 440 A.2d 137, 139 (R.I. 1982), the court noted that police are often called upon to perform “community caretaking functions” that have nothing to do with the apprehension and conviction of alleged criminals. These scenarios require the officer to investigate when the officer has reasonable grounds to suspect something amiss. Id. Here, the officer responded to a call and at first inquired about the defendant’s condition. During this caretaking function the officer, the officer began to suspect the defendant had operated his vehicle under the influence of alcohol. The Appeals Panel held that the officer had the right to investigate as part of the officer’s “community caretaking functions.” Accordingly, the decision of the trial court was affirmed.
State of Rhode Island v. Bryan E. Menge, No. T15-0036 (July 27, 2016).pdf
Appeals Panel
07/27/2016
State of Rhode Island v. Bryan E. Menge, No. T15-0036 (July 27, 2016)
Reasonable Grounds/Probable Cause
Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (“refusal to submit to chemical test”). Defendant argued that the officer did not have probable cause required by § 31-27-2.1 to arrest the defendant for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol. In State v. Perry, 731 A.2d 720 (R.I. 2000), the court held that the arresting officer was authorized to request that the defendant submit to a chemical test even though the officer did not witness the defendant operate his vehicle under the influence of alcohol, holding that the arresting officer only needed reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant had operated the vehicle. Id. Defendant in this case admitted that he had visited various bars and pulled over into the parking lot because “he had too much to drink.” Accordingly, the decision of the trial court finding reasonable grounds was affirmed.
State of Rhode Island v. Bryan E. Menge, No. T15-0036 (July 27, 2016).pdf