Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). The Court held that there was ample evidence that the defendant was operating a vehicle under the influence because he admitted numerous times that he was the driver, had bloodshot and watery eyes, emitted an odor of alcohol from his breath, and looked as if he was going to fall asleep on the side of the road.  The Court held that the officer complied with G.L. 1956 § 31-27-3 (Right to a Physical Examination) even though he failed to read the defendant his rights while at the scene of the accident because he immediately read the defendant his rights as soon as he was arrested, which was before the defendant was asked to take a chemical test.  Thus, the Court affirmed the violation against the defendant.