Summons

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial judge sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-27-2.1 (refusal to submit to a chemical test). The Court held that the summons was sufficiently clear to inform the defendant of the charge against him despite the officer’s failure to correctly identify the defendant’s vehicle on the summons or have it notarized. Because this did not constitute prejudicial error, the Court affirmed the decision of the trial court sustaining the charge against the defendant.  

City of Warwick v. Robert Iannotti, C.A. No. T09-0086 (September 17, 2009).pdf