Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test) and § 31-47-9 (operation without proof of insurance). The Court held that the citing officer’s testimony that the defendant was unable to provide proof of insurance was sufficient to prove that the defendant had committed the offense. Furthermore, the defendant failed to provide any proof of insurance at trial. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the decision sustaining the charge against the defendant.