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 defendant claimed that the trial judge was clearly erroneous in crediting the officer because of inconsistencies between his testimony and his report.  However, the Court held that only the finder of fact may assess the credibility of the witnesses. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the decision of the trial court sustaining the charges against the defendant.