Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test).  Specifically, the Defendant argued that the arresting Officer did not swear to the veracity of his report before a notary, in violation of the statute.  At trial, the Officer testified that although the report had been notarized before trial, he was not present at the time it was notarized and he did not swear to its veracity.  The Panel explained that the plain language of the statute requires the existence of a “sworn report.”  The Panel held that because the Officer did not swear to the veracity of the report in the presence of a notary, the State could not satisfy the requirements of the statute.  Accordingly, the Panel dismissed the charged violation.