Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits), R.I.G.L. 1956 §31-10-6 (graduated licensing for person under the age of eighteen), R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-22-22 (safety belt use), and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-7 (places where overtaking prohibited).  The Appeals Panel held that imposing sanctions under R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-10-26(e) (issuance of license), was applicable to the defendant.  The Court reasoned that interpreting the statute as a whole, looking at the entire statutory scheme and the intent of the Legislature, the defendant qualified as an “applicant” under the statue because “applicant” is defined as “a person who applies for or requests something; a candidate,” and the defendant is an “applicant” to obtain his full operator’s license.  Accordingly, the Court sustained the violations.