09/21/2015
The Defendant appealed the trial judge’s decision to sustain the charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-1 (right half of the road). The Defendant argued that the trial judge’s decision was made upon unlawful procedure where he improperly “un-dismissed” the case. Here, the Town moved to dismiss the charge because the Officer was unable to attend the trial date. After the trial judge dismissed the charge, the Defendant tried to speak and the trial judge told him not to say anything else. The trial judge asked the Defendant to apologize to the court and, when the Defendant refused, the trial judge continued the matter for a new trial date. After a trial on that date, the trial judge sustained the charge. The Panel noted that in order to vacate a dismissal, the moving party must have made a motion. The Panel held that the trial judge’s order dismissing the case should not have been vacated because neither party motioned to vacate the dismissal. Accordingly, the Panel noted that the trial judge’s decision was in violation of statutory provisions and affected by error of law and dismissed the charged violation.
Town of Coventry v. Emil Carsetti, C.A. No. M15-0001 (September 21, 2015).pdf