Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test).  The Court, following State v. Quattrucci, 39 A.2d 1036 (R.I. 2012), emphasized that the right to a confidential phone call only attached when the purpose of the call is to speak to an attorney or arrange for bail.  Here, the defendant was only calling his wife.  Also, this court noted there was no evidence of prejudice to the defendant as even if the officer heard the contents of the defendant’s call, there was no evidence she revealed what she heard. Accordingly, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.