Defendant appealed a trial judge’s decision sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-26-5 (duty in accident resulting in damage to highway fixtures). Police officers responded to a report that a truck struck a telephone pole. Subsequently, officers located a vehicle that matched a reported description of the truck involved in the accident. At trial, the trial judge inferred that Defendant’s vehicle struck the telephone pole based on a police officer’s testimony that (1) Defendant’s vehicle had damage consistent with striking a pole and (2) Defendant admitted to recently being in the area of the accident.

On appeal, Defendant argued that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to sustain the charged violation. The Appeals Panel noted that it “lacks the authority to assess witness credibility” and that a “trial [judge] may ‘draw inferences from the testimony of witnesses.’” See State v. Link, 633 A.2d 1345, 1348 (R.I. 1993) (citing Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Janes, 633 A.2d 536, 537 (R.I. 1991)). Here, the trial judge’s inference and decision were based on finding an officer’s testimony to be credible. As such, the Appeals Panel held that there was sufficient evidence to support the trial judge’s decision. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel affirmed the trial judge’s decision.