Defendant appealed the decision of the magistrate of the R.I. Traffic Tribunal sustaining violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit) and R.I. G.L. 1956 § 31-22-21.1 (open container) after a car accident. The Defendant argued that, in the absence of a toxicology report on the liquid in the container found in the Defendant’s vehicle, there was insufficient evidence to prove that its contents were alcoholic. The Appeals Panel dismissed this argument, finding the fact that the liquid looked and smelled like wine, coupled with the Defendant’s admission that he had been drinking wine that day, were sufficient to satisfy the burden of proof.  Therefore, the Appeals Panel held that the Trial Magistrate’s decision was supported by the evidence, was not affected by error of law, and did not constitute an abuse of discretion. The appeal was denied and the violation sustained.