Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits). The defendant alleged that the traffic stop was only a pretext to stop him.  The Court held that because it did not observe the testimony of either the defendant or the officers regarding the reason for the traffic stop it was limited to the record presented and must defer to the trier of facts determinations of credibility pursuant to §31-41.8(f). Additionaly, the Court held that even if the police had a dual motive for the stop that did not make it fatally pretextual. The officer’s testimony reflected all the elements to sustain the violation. Accordingly, the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record did not show a clear error of law and the Court affirmed the decision of the trial judge sustaiing the violation against the defendant.