Discovery

Defendant appealed a decision of the trial judge sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits). Defendant had filed a Motion for Discovery and, when no discovery was received, filed a Motion to Compel Discovery. On the trial date Defendant still had not received the discovery he had requested and moved to dismiss. The trial judge offered Defendant a continuance to obtain the discovery, which Defendant declined. On appeal, Defendant argued that the trial judge erred by denying Defendant’s motion to dismiss “based on the State Police’s failure to comply with the court ordered discovery request.” Rule 11 of the Rhode Island Traffic Tribunal Rules of Procedure provides a trial judge with discretion in choosing a remedy to a party’s failure to comply with a discovery order. The Appeals Panel held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion by denying Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Magistrate Noonan concurred in the judgment, noting that he would have dismissed the matter at trial due to the blatant discovery violation.

State of Rhode Island v. Domenick Connors, T18-0005 (August 6, 2018).pdf