Due Process

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-13-4 “Obedience to traffic control devices.”  The issuing Officers charged Defendant after observing him operate his vehicle through a red light from a fixed position with an unobstructed view.  Defendant argued that the trial judge violated his Due Process rights when the judge allegedly made an in-court but off-the-record comment that the Defendant would be in more trouble if he continued down the road he was going. The Panel noted that if the alleged comment was made, it was made in open court in the presence of all interested parties.  The Panel held that the words allegedly spoken by the judge were unrelated to the case and the charge and were, therefore, immaterial.  The Panel held that the trial judge’s decision to sustain the charge was based on legally competent evidence – the testimony of the officer – and that the Defendant did not present any defenses to the facts underlying the charge.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violation.

Town of North Providence vs. Mark Medeiros, C.A. No. M13-0005 (November 4, 2013).pdf