Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (speeding). Defendant claimed that the decision of the trial judge was in error because he failed to allow the defendant to submit his copy of the ticket into evidence or give weight to his testimony that the officer took back the ticket after the defendant had signed it and increased the fine. The District Court, after stating that the trial judge was correct in holding that it was irrelevant as to when the ticket was signed, held that credibility determinations are solely within the fact-finder’s discretion. Therefore, the trial judge did not err when he choose not to give any weight to the testimony regarding what happened after the defendant was stopped. Accordingly, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.