Appeals Panel
08/25/2009
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 Operating Without Insurance
Operating without Insurance
Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits), R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-3-1 (operation of an unregistered vehicle), and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-47-9 (verification of proof of financial security). The Appeals Panel held that a violation of § 31-47-9 requires that the vehicle be registered in Rhode Island. Since the the defendant’s vehicle was not registered in Rhode Island, the Court reversed the trial magistrate and remanded with instructions to dismiss the violation of § 31-47-9.
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 (August 25, 2009).pdf
Appeals Panel
08/25/2009
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 Operating without Insurance
Operating without Insurance
Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 §31-14-2 (prima facie limits), R.I.G.L. 1956 §31-3-1 (operation of an unregistered vehicle), and R.I.G.L. 1956 §31-47-9 (proof of financial security). The Appeals Panel held that the trial magistrate erred by not requiring the state to offer proof of the defendant’s knowledge that he was operating the vehicle without financial security. Since knowledge is an essential element for proving the violation of § 31-47-9, the Court reversed the trial magistrate’s decision and remanded with instructions to dismiss the violation.
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 (August 25, 2009).pdf
Appeals Panel
08/25/2009
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 Hearsay
Hearsay
Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits), R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-3-1 (operation of an unregistered vehicle), and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-47-9 (verification of proof of financial security). The Court held that the trooper’s testimony regarding his inquiry into the National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) and his finding that the defendant’s vehicle was not validly registered did not constitute inadmissible hearsay as the defendant alleged. The Court ruled that the NCIC information was not “an out of court utterance as required under the well settled definition of hearsay,” pursuant to Worcester Textile Co. v. Morales, 468 A.2d 279, 281 (R.I. 1983). Therefore, the officer’s testimony was legally competent evidence contained in the record, and was sufficient to sustain the violation of §31-3-1. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the trial magistrate’s decision.
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 (August 25, 2009).pdf
Appeals Panel
08/25/2009
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 Speedometer Calibration
Speedometer Calibration
Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits), R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-3-1 (operation of an unregistered vehicle), and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-47-9 (verification of proof of financial security). The Appeals Panel held that the trial magistrate erroneously allowed the trooper to testify as to the calibration of his cruiser’s speedometer without first requiring him to introduce the calibration sheet into evidence. The Court held that this constituted reversible error of law pursuant to State v. Mancino, 340 A.2d 128 (R.I. 1975). Accordingly, the Court reversed the decision of the trial magistrate and remanded with instructions to dismiss the speeding violation.
State of Rhode Island v. Jim Desrosiers, C.A. No. T09-0052 (August 25, 2009).pdf