Procedure

Defendant appealed decision of the trial judge sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-16-1 (care in starting from stop). After approaching a stop sign, Defendant noticed a vehicle approaching from the left, but attempted to cross the intersection anyway. Defendant’s vehicle was struck from the left by a driver who had the right of way. At trial, the patrolman who observed the scene of the accident testified that Defendant caused the accident by moving her vehicle in an “unsafe manner.” Defendant argued that there was insufficient evidence to support the trial judge’s decision. § 31-16-1 provides that “[n]o person shall start a vehicle which is stopped . . . unless and until the movement can be made with reasonable safety.” In part, Defendant argued that the trial judge admitted improper expert opinion testimony from a non-expert witness. The trial judge stated that the patrolman was testifying as a lay witness, and, pursuant to Rhode Island Rule of Evidence 701, a lay witness may offer opinion testimony which is “limited to ‘opinions which are . . . rationally based on the perception of the witness.’”  Here, the patrolman’s opinion was based on his physical observations of the scene of the accident. As such, the Appeals Panel held that the trial judge did not improperly admit expert opinion testimony. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel affirmed the decision of the trial judge.

State of Rhode Island v. Rosa Diarbian, No. T17-0006 (December 20,2018).pdf