Defendant appealed the judgment of the Appeals Panel affirming the trial magistrate’s verdict 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 Appeals Panel erred because he agreed to take the chemical test and made a good faith effort to do so. The Trooper testified that, while the Defendant initially agreed to take the test, he did not cooperate with the instructions in order to give a sufficient sample. The Defendant testified that he tried to cooperate and take the test. The Court noted that to sustain the charge, it must find that the decision was supported by legally competent evidence. The Court held that because the trial magistrate relied on the video of the test and the Trooper’s testimony, which he found to be credible, to find as a matter of fact that the Defendant willfully failed to follow instructions, there was sufficient evidence to prove the refusal element by conduct. Accordingly, the Court upheld the decision to sustain the violation.