Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). The defendant challenged whether the officer had reasonable grounds to ask him to submit to a chemical test. The arresting officer testified that the defendant had admitted to the consumption of alcohol, had watery eyes, slurred speech, and failed two field sobriety tests, and had approached the officer’s cruiser at a high rate of speed, nearly hitting the cruiser.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the trial judge’s decision and held that these facts provided reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant had operated a vehicle under the influence.