Speeding

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits).  While not denying that his speed exceeded the posted speed limit, the Defendant argued the charge should be dismissed because the Officer testified at trial that no “engineering speed study” had been conducted on the section of road he was traveling as required by Section 2B-13 of the Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).  Without reaching this argument, the Panel noted the Officer did not testify to her training in the use of radar.  Therefore, the Panel held the State could not prove its case under State v. Sprague, 322 A.2d 36 (R.I. 1974).  Accordingly, the Panel dismissed the charged violation.

Town of North Kingstown v. Christopher Foley, C.A. No. M12-0007 (December 27, 2012).pdf