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.

Stephen Beauregard v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 11-0104 (October 18, 2011)

Stephen Beauregard v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 11-0104 (October 18, 2011).pdf
District Court
10/18/2011
Stephen Beauregard v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 11-0104 Telephone Call

Telephone Call

Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit).  The Court held that the right to a confidential phone call does not apply to defendants charged with only a civil violation. However, the Court went on to note that even if the defendant did have the right to a confidential phone call, it was not violated because the defendant was awarded one phone call and the officer was a few feet away. Lastly, even if that was not considered a confidential phone call, the Court held that the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 12-7-20 (Right to a Confidential Phone Call) does not warrant a dismissal in this case.

Stephen Beauregard v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 11-0104 (October 18, 2011).pdf

District Court
10/18/2011
Stephen Beauregard v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 11-0104 Right to an Independent Medical Examination

Right to an Independent Medical Examination

Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit). The Court held that the defendant’s right to an independent medical examination was not violated because the defendant never expressed a desire to have one.  The defendant was informed of his rights and given notice.  The statute does not require the state to prove the officer provided the defendant with a reasonable opportunity to get an independent medical examination.  However, the Court went on to state that even if a reasonable opportunity was necessary, in this case, the state demonstrated that the officer did give the defendant a reasonable opportunity to get an independent medical examination.  In State v. Langella, 650 A.2d 478 (R.I. 1994) one phone call was enough to satisfy that a defendant was given reasonable opportunity to obtain an independent medical examination.  Thus, because the defendant was given one phone call, the Court found that the defendant was given a reasonable opportunity.  Accordingly, the violation against the defendant was sustained. 

Stephen Beauregard v. State of Rhode Island, A.A. No. 11-0104 (October 18, 2011).pdf