Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27- 2.1 (refusal to submit) and 1956 § 31-22-21.1 (open container). Defendant claimed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of open container was clearly erroneous because the citing officer did not observe the defendant driving, but only observed an open container in the center console of the defendant’s vehicle after approaching the defendant in a parking lot while he was standing outside the car “rummaging through the trunk.” The District Court held that there was no evidence from which a fact-finder could determine that the beer can was open while the defendant was driving because the officer testified that he did not know when the contents of the beer can were consumed. Accordingly, the Court found the decision of the Appeals Panel was clearly erroneous in light of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence of record and reversed the decision.