Failure to Prosecute

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial court sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-18-5 (“crossing other than at crosswalks”). Defendant argued that there was a lack of prosecution at trial because the officer who issued the citation was not present at trial. Generally speaking, a “lack of prosecution” claim is brought by a motion to dismiss an action “which has been pending for five years or more.” R.I.G.L. 1956 § 9-8-3. Following U.S. v. Sampson, 486 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2007), the Appeals Panel held that the prosecution need only meet their burden of proof and may do so in any manner it deems fit. Applying the facts, the prosecution had witnesses who had personal knowledge of the incident. These witnesses were enough to satisfy the burden of proof. Accordingly, the trial court’s decision was affirmed.

City of Woonsocket v. Matthew Machado, No. M16-0001 (September 15, 2016).pdf