Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-24-1 (times when lights required). The Defendant argued that the charged violation had not been proven by clear and convincing evidence because the trial magistrate improperly took judicial notice of the fact that the time of the charged violation, approximately 1:30 a.m., was between sunrise and sunset. The Panel noted that, pursuant to Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure for the Traffic Tribunal, a trial magistrate may take judicial notice of a fact not subject to reasonable dispute if it is generally known without the jurisdiction of the court or capable of accurate and ready determination by sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. The Panel determined that the trial magistrate’s decision to take judicial notice of the fact was based on a belief that was not subject to reasonable dispute because it is generally known and capable of accurate and ready determination by resorting to sources whose accuracy cannot be questioned. Accordingly, the Panel found that the trial magistrate’s decision to take judicial notice of the fact that 1:30 a.m. is between sunrise and sunset was not an abuse of his discretion and, therefore, the Panel sustained the charged violation.