Credibility

Defendant appealed a trial judge’s decision sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-13-4 (obedience to traffic devices). A police officer reported to the scene of a motor vehicle accident at a four-way intersection with four stop signs. At trial, the police officer testified that he asked Defendant whether he had stopped, and that Defendant responded by saying he was not sure and that he thought he had stopped. Also, the other driver involved in the accident testified that she asked Defendant why he did not stop, and that Defendant said that he did not see the stop sign. The trial judge found all of this testimony credible and, therefore, found Defendant guilty of the charged violation.

On appeal, Defendant argued that the trial judge erred in crediting the testimony of the police officer and the other driver. But it is well-established that credibility determinations are reserved for trial judges. See generally DeSimone Electric, Inc. v. CMG, Inc., et al., A.2d 613, 621 (R.I. 2006). As such, the Appeals Panel held that the trial judge’s decision was not clearly erroneous because the Panel “lacks the authority to assess witness credibility or to substitute its judgment for that of the hearing judge concerning the weight of evidence on questions of fact.” Link v. State, 633 A.2d 1345, 1348 (R.I. 1993) (citing Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Janes, 586 A.2d 536, 537 (R.I. 1991)). Accordingly, the Appeals Panel affirmed the trial judge’s decision.

State of Rhode Island v. Chiyu Mui M19-0003 (May 6, 2019).pdf