Defendant appealed the decision of the Appeals Panel sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits). Defendant claimed that the decision of the Appeals Panel should be set aside because the judge erred in crediting the testimony of the citing officer. The District Court held that the review of factual determinations is limited to whether the decision was clearly erroneous in light of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence of record. Here, the factual finding by the trial judge that the defendant was speeding was not clearly erroneous because it was fully supported by the record where the officer testified to the defendant’s speed, the recent calibration of the radar device, and that he had been properly trained in the use of radar devices. Accordingly, the Court sustained the violation against the defendant.