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 argued that the arresting officer’s testimony about time frames rendered the officer’s testimony incredible. The panel held that the trier of fact is entitled to make decisions regarding the credibility of witnesses. As such, the magistrate’s decision to credit the officer’s testimony was not clearly erroneous. The Panel affirmed the magistrate’s decision and sustained the charged violation.