Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2(a), “prima facie limits.” At trial, the Officer testified that he initially watched two vehicles leave the South Beach parking lot, one traveling at sixty-eight miles-per-hour and the second (Defendant’s vehicle) traveling at sixty-two miles-per-hour, in a twenty-five mile-per-hour zone.  Before stopping Defendant’s vehicle, however, the Officer pursued but lost the first vehicle.  The Officer then went back to locate Defendant’s vehicle, a silver Mitsubishi with “wavy graphic lines.” The Officer testified that by the time he reached Defendant’s vehicle, Defendant had slowed to a legal speed.  The Panel noted that the trial judge was satisfied that the Officer properly identified Defendant’s vehicle as the vehicle he initially saw speeding.  Additionally, the Officer testified that he had been properly trained in the use of radar equipment and that his radar equipment had been calibrated and was in good working order on the day of the citation.  The Panel held that the trial judge sustained the charge based on legally competent evidence.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violation.