Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 §§ 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test) and 31-14-3 (conditions requiring reduced speed).  Defendant argued that the Officer did not have reasonable grounds to warrant a second chemical test to determine the presence of drugs or a controlled substance.  The Panel noted that the Officer observed the Defendant operating his vehicle erratically at twice the posted speed limit during inclement weather.  After stopping the Defendant the Officer observed that he smelled of alcohol, had “glassy” eyes, was driving in the opposite direction of his intended location, failed two field sobriety tests, and was in possession of two bottles of pills.  The Panel held that, under the totality of the circumstances, the Officer had reasonable grounds to suspect the Defendant was impaired by alcohol or drugs, and after a breathalyzer test ruled out alcohol as the cause of the Defendant’s impairment, the Officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the cause of the Defendant’s impairment was prescription or illicit drugs.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violations.