Appeals Panel
01/19/2021
State of Rhode Island v. Weixing Wang No. M20-0007 Manner of Turning
Manner of Turning
The Defendant appealed the Trial Magistrate’s decision sustaining the charged violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-17-2, Vehicle turning left or right. An officer for the East Providence Police Department testified that when he arrived at the scene of an accident, he “observed two vehicles that appeared to be in a collision, each sustaining heavy damage.” The officer identified the Defendant as the driver of one of the vehicles involved in the collision. The officer learned that the defendant was traveling westbound, attempting to make a left turn at an intersection and failed to see the other vehicle traveling eastbound. The driver of the other vehicle testified that he had a green light and was unable to stop in time to avoid the collision. The Trial Magistrate found the Defendant guilty and the Defendant appealed.
RIGL Section 31-17-2 provides “The driver of a vehicle within an intersection intended to turn to the left or right shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction which is within the intersection or so close to it as to constitute an immediate hazard.” The Trial Magistrate found that the other motorist had a green light and that the Defendant took his left turn when it was not safe for him to do so. The Appeals Panel gave deference to the Trial Magistrate’s decision and sustained the charged violation. State of Rhode Island v. Weixing Wang No. M20-0007(January 19, 2021).pdf
Appeals Panel
11/04/2019
State of Rhode Island v. Jeffrey D’Ambra, No. M18-0012 (November 4, 2019)
Manner of Turning
Defendant appealed a trial judge’s decision sustaining a violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-16-2 (manner of turning at intersection). A police officer observed Defendant making a right turn in a manner which resulted in Defendant traveling in the middle of two lanes upon the completion of the turn. At trial, Defendant admitted to traveling in the middle of two lanes immediately after taking the right turn. On appeal, Defendant argued that the trial judge erred because Defendant executed the turn at a lawful distance from the curb.
Under § 31-16-2, a driver making a right turn must make the turn “as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway.” See § 31-16-2. Based on Defendant’s testimony that he ended up in the middle of two lanes after initiating the right turn, the trial judge determined that Defendant violated the statute because he was not “as close as practicable” to the curb. As such, the Appeals Panel held that the trial judge’s decision was supported by sufficient evidence. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel affirmed the trial judge’s decision in part.
Note: The trial judge improperly issued sanctions pursuant to § 31-27-24 (Colin Foote Statute). As such, the Appeals Panel reversed the trial judge’s decision in part.
State of Rhode Island v. Jeffrey D’Ambra, No. M18-0012 (November 4, 2019).pdf
Appeals Panel
04/24/2018
City of Pawtucket v. Robert Goff, No. M16-0008 (April 24, 2018)
Manner of Turning
Defendant appealed a decision by a Pawtucket Municipal Court Trial Judge sustaining a charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-17-2 (Vehicle turning left or right). Defendant turned left onto a road and was struck by a police officer’s cruiser that had been approaching from the opposite direction. At trial, Defendant testified that he had not seen any cars coming, so he pulled out of the intersection and turned left without stopping. An eyewitness testified that both he and the officer were on the road Defendant turned off of and that the officer was traveling at a speed he believed to be “almost 50 miles per hour.” Two police officers testified, stating that the accident was consistent with both vehicles going at a rate of about 30 to 35 miles per hour, and that Defendant had failed to yield the right of way in turning left, thus resulting in the accident. Defendant argued that the Trial Judge committed error because the Trial Judge did not make any findings of fact regarding the location of the vehicles at the time Defendant began turning or the speed of the officer’s vehicle at the time Defendant began turning. The Appeals Panel, however, noted that it was not free to substitute its own opinion on the credibility of the testifying witnesses. The Appeals Panel further noted that the Trial Judge had made the determination that the officer’s cruiser posed an “immediate hazard” to Defendant, requiring Defendant to yield the right of way, based on the testimony of all the witnesses in the case. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel found that the Trial Judge’s decision was properly supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law and affirmed the Trial Judge’s decision.
City of Pawtucket v. Robert Goff, No. M16-0008 (April 24, 2018).pdf
Appeals Panel
02/08/2016
State of Rhode Island v. Francisco Aponte, C.A. No. T15-0033 (February 8, 2016)
Manner of Turning
The Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision sustaining the charged violation of G.L. 1956 § 31-16-2 (manner of turning at intersection). A Rhode Island State Trooper testified that he observed the Defendant veer left and then quickly back to the right to complete a right hand turn. The Defendant argued that the trooper’s testimony did not meet the statutory requirements of the sustained charge. The Panel held that the testimony concerning the manner in which the Defendant turned showed a clear violation of the statutory language found in § 31-16-2 because the statute requires that “the approach for a right turn and a right turn shall be made as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway.” Accordingly, the Panel found the sustained charge was supported through evidence in the record and not erroneous. The appeal was denied and the charged violation was sustained.
State of Rhode Island v. Francisco Aponte, C.A. No. T15-0033 (February 8, 2016).pdf