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 § 31-15-1 (right half of road). Following Porcaro v. R.I.T.T., A.A. No. 01-12 (DeRobbio, C.J.), the Court held that the burden of proof is on the motorist to show that he or she was physically incapable of submitting to a chemical test. Absent an obvious incapacitating injury, the defendant must provide expert testimony corroborating the injury and the injury’s effect on taking a chemical test. Here, the evidence offered by the defendant was vague and only showed the existence of an injury, not how the injury would prevent him from taking a chemical test. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the decision sustaining the charges against the defendant.