Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate 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 § 31-22-21.1 (presence of alcoholic beverages while operating or riding in a motor vehicle). The Court held that the officer’s testimony regarding a statement the defendant made at the scene that “[he] was driving” was admissible. As the testimony was offered against the defendant at trial and was the defendant’s own statement, it did not amount to hearsay under Rule 801(d)(2)(A). Accordingly, the Court affirmed the trial magistrate’s decision and sustained the charge against the defendant.