Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits). Defendant argued that he was prejudiced because the trial judge questioned the officer. The Appeals Panel held that the defendant failed to object to the question asked or the answer given. However, even if the issue had been properly preserved for review, the Court concluded that trial judge’s question to the officer — “How far away was your fixed position when you targeted the vehicle?” — was not improper because it was for clarification purposes and did not rise to the level of being an advocate for the prosecution. Accordingly, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.