Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the violations of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test) and R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-11 (laned roadway). Defendant claimed that because she submitted to a PBT at the scene she should not have been requested to submit to another test at the station. The Court held that the language of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 only refers to the “actual” test given at the station and the language of the statute was not intended to include PBTs. Accordingly, the Court held that the defendant had not been prejudiced and sustained the violation of § 31-27-2.1.