Credibility Determinations

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test).  The Appeals Panel held that they lacked the authority to assess witness credibility or to substitute its judgments for that of the hearing magistrate’s concerning the weight of evidence on questions of fact.  Also, the Court reasoned that there was ample evidence for the officer to believe that the defendant was operating her vehicle under the influence because she was driving erratically, she emitted an odor of alcohol from her breath, her eye’s were glossy, and she admitted to consuming alcohol.  Thus, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.

Town of South Kingston v. Marsha Rooney, C.A. No. T11-0009 (April 19, 2011).pdf