The Defendant appealed the trial judge’s decision to sustain the charged violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-26-4 (duty on collision with unattended vehicle) and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to chemical test). The Defendant argued that the trial judge erred in sustaining the violation of refusal to submit to a chemical test because the dispatch received by the Officer was insufficient to furnish him with probable cause to arrest the Defendant for leaving the scene of an accident. Here, the Officer received a detailed description of the Defendant and there was no one else in the vicinity matching the description. Once in contact with the Defendant, the Officer observed that her breath and person emanated an odor of alcohol, her speech was slurred, her eyes were bloodshot and watery, and she was unsteady on her feet. The Panel further held that the Officer had probable cause to arrest the Defendant because a reasonably prudent person would have believed it was more probable than not that the Defendant’s vehicle collided with the unoccupied vehicle. Accordingly, the Panel upheld the trial judge’s decision to sustain the charged violation of refusal to submit to a chemical test.