The Defendant appealed the Trial Magistrate’s decision sustaining the charged violation for speeding. A Sergeant testified to observing a vehicle moving at a high speed. The Sergeant obtained a moving radar reading of 88 miles per hour in a 55 mile per hour zone. Additionally, he testified to his training in using a radar unit and  that he calibrated the unit that day and determined it to be in good working condition. The Sergeant identified the Defendant as the driver and cited him for going “65 miles an hour in a 55 mile per hour zone. The Defendant testified that he was not speeding and that he sped up when he noticed a vehicle that turned out to be the patrol car tailgating him. The Trial Judge sustained the charge and the Defendant appealed.

The Appeals Panel relied upon State v. Sprague, 322 A.2d 36 (1974), to support its finding that sufficient evidence had been submitted to show that Defendant was guilty of the charged violation. The Appeals Panel found that the Sargent had satisfied both prongs of the Sprague test when he testified as to his training in the use of the radar and testified as to the operational accuracy of the radar when he stated it had been calibrated and in good working condition. The Panel sustained the charged violation.