Defendant appealed the trial judge’s decision to sustain the charged violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-22-30, “Text Messaging While Operating a Motor Vehicle.”  Defendant claimed that the trial judge’s decision was an abuse of discretion because the judge favored the testimony of the charging Trooper over the testimony of defendant.  At trial, the Trooper testified that on Route 95 at 12:15 a.m. he pulled alongside the driver’s side of defendant’s vehicle and observed defendant holding his cell phone at eye-level while manipulating the text message screen, which was illuminated in plain view.  The Trooper further testified that defendant, while holding the cell phone, abruptly swerved in and out of the lane of travel.  The defendant testified that the Trooper mistook his Mini Cooper’s interior “mood lighting” as illumination from a cell phone.  The Panel explained that it will not substitute its judgment of witness credibility for that of the trial judge.  The Panel noted that the trial judge was satisfied by the Trooper’s testimony that he observed the defendant at close range handling a cell phone and manipulating its screen at eye-level.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violation.