Defendant appealed a trial magistrate’s decision sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 21-28-4.01(c)(1) (possession of marijuana, 1 ounce or less, 18 years or older). While a state trooper was conducting a traffic stop, Defendant admitted to possessing marijuana, and then Defendant handed the marijuana to the state trooper. At trial, the state trooper testified as to Defendant’s admission as well as to the results of field testing that he had performed. Also, the state presented a forensic scientist for the Rhode Island Department of Health as an expert witness, who testified as to the results of three tests on the substance that Defendant handed to the state trooper. All three tests yielded positive results for marijuana. On appeal, Defendant argued that the state failed to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the substance Defendant handed to the state trooper was marijuana.

Here, the Appeals Panel held that the trial magistrate’s decision was supported by legally competent evidence because the record was filled with evidence from which the trial magistrate could form a firm belief that the substance was in fact marijuana. The Panel explicitly declined to rule on “whether the NARK II field test, standing alone, [may be] sufficient to prove that [a] substance is marijuana.” Instead, the Panel relied on the totality of the evidence. First, the state trooper testified that Defendant admitted to possessing marijuana. Second, the state trooper conducted a field test on the substance which yielded a positive result for marijuana. Third, and most importantly, expert scientific testimony supported the trial magistrate’s conclusion that the substance was marijuana. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel affirmed the trial magistrate’s decision.