RI District Court and Traffic Tribunal Case Law

This website is in no way affiliated with, sponsored by, or supported by the Rhode Island Judiciary, the Rhode Island District Court, or Rhode Island Traffic Tribunal.

State of Rhode Island v. Ramel Shaw, C.A. No. T14-0060 (September 25, 2015)

State of Rhode Island v. Ramel Shaw, C.A. No. T14-0060 (September 25, 2015).pdf
Appeals Panel
09/25/2015
State of Rhode Island v. Ramel Shaw, C.A. No. T14-0060 (September 25, 2015)

Failure to Maintain Control

The Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the charged violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-11 (laned roadway) and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-1 (failure to maintain control). The Defendant argued that the trial magistrate erred in sustaining the violations because there was not reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the record. Here, the Defendant’s counsel conceded that the evidence supported the laned roadway violation. Additionally, a witness to the accident testified that she observed the Defendant’s vehicle strike another car while attempting to change lanes and then “bolt over the guardrail.” The Panel held that the trial magistrate had sufficient evidence to support the charged violations. Accordingly, the Panel upheld the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the charged violations.

State of Rhode Island v. Ramel Shaw, C.A. No. T14-0060 (September 25, 2015).pdf

Appeals Panel
09/25/2015
State of Rhode Island v. Ramel Shaw, C.A. No. T14-0060 (September 25, 2015)

Summons

The Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the charged violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-11 (laned roadway) and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-1 (failure to maintain control). The Defendant argued that the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the laned roadway violation was made upon unlawful procedure because the Defendant’s counsel was unaware of the charge and information regarding the charge should have been presented to his counsel during discovery. The Panel held that the Defendant had sufficient notice of the violation because he received a summons listing the laned roadway violation. Accordingly, the Panel upheld the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the laned roadway violation.

State of Rhode Island v. Ramel Shaw, C.A. No. T14-0060 (September 25, 2015).pdf