Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits), R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-3-1 (operation of an unregistered vehicle), and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-47-9 (verification of proof of financial security). The Court held that the trooper’s testimony regarding his inquiry into the National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) and his finding that the defendant’s vehicle was not validly registered did not constitute inadmissible hearsay as the defendant alleged. The Court ruled that the NCIC information was not “an out of court utterance as required under the well settled definition of hearsay,” pursuant to Worcester Textile Co. v. Morales, 468 A.2d 279, 281 (R.I. 1983). Therefore, the officer’s testimony was legally competent evidence contained in the record, and was sufficient to sustain the violation of §31-3-1. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the trial magistrate’s decision.