Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-1 (right half of road) and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). Defendant argued that the trial magistrate abused his discretion and denied the defendant the right to a fair and impartial hearing. The Court held that the trial magistrate abused his discretion because he made conclusory statements regarding his determination of the defendant’s guilt and the credibility of the state’s witness before the defendant had an opportunity to present his case in chief. Accordingly, the Court concluded that the defendant had been prejudiced by the trial magistrate’s abuse of discretion and remanded the case for further proceedings.