The Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-11 (laned roadways). The Defendant argued that the State did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that the violation occurred. Here, the Detective testified that the Defendant’s vehicle changed lanes in a dangerous manner. The Panel held that because the relevant statute provides that a driver cannot cross lanes until it is safe to do so, the State presented sufficient testimony to meet the elements. Accordingly, the Panel upheld the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the violation.