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 argued that the arresting officer’s testimony establishing three events occurring at 1:38a.m. rendered the officer’s testimony incredible. The Court held that the trier of fact is entitled to make decisions regarding the credibility of witnesses. As such the magistrate’s decision to credit the officer’s testimony was not clearly erroneous. The Court affirmed the Appeals Panel decision and held these facts provided reasonable grounds to administer a field sobriety test.