Evidence

Defendant appealed a trial judge’s decision sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-13-4 (obedience to traffic devices). At trial, the trial judge found that Defendant ran through a red light and hit another vehicle while proceeding through the intersection. The trial judge’s findings were inferred from uncontroverted testimony that established that the traffic light was in working order and that the vehicle which was hit was proceeding through a green light. On appeal, Defendant argued that the prosecution failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Defendant proceeded through a red light.

Rhode Island Traffic Tribunal Rule of Procedure 17(a) requires that the prosecution prove a violation by clear and convincing evidence. Evidence is clear and convincing when it “produce[s] in the mind of the factfinder a firm belief or conviction that the allegations in question are true.” Cahill v. Morrow, 11 A.3d 82, 88 n.7 (R.I. 2011) (quoting 29 Am. Jur. 2d evidence § 173 at 188-89 (2008)). The Appeals Panel found that the trial judge made a reasonable inference that Defendant proceeded through a red light based on testimony that the light was in working order and that the light in the other direction was green. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel affirmed the trial judge’s decision.

State of Rhode Island v. Ralyauou Diallo, No. M18-0016 (March 11, 2019).pdf