Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit) and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-17-5 (entering from a private road without yielding). Defendant claimed that the officer lacked reasonable grounds to believe that she had operated a vehicle while under the influence. The District Court held that the officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant was operating a vehicle while under the influence because the defendant admitted to the consumption of alcohol, had watery eyes, emitted an odor of alcohol, appeared confused, was evasive in answering the officer’s questions, had mumbled speech, failed the walk and turn field sobriety test, and operated her vehicle erratically by failing to yield when exiting a parking lot. Accordingly, the Court held that the state established by clear and convincing evidence that there were reasonable grounds for the officer to believe that the defendant was operating under the influence and sustained the violation.