Clearance for Overtaking

Defendant appealed the decision of the trial magistrate sustaining the violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-15-6 (clearance for overtaking).  Defendant argued that the trial magistrate’s decision was an error of law because there was insufficient testimony to support the charge.  The Panel noted that the Officer testified that the vehicle was driven to the left side of the center of the roadway without enough visibility and the roadway was not free of oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance to permit the overtaking without interfering with the safe operation of vehicles approaching from the opposite direction.  The Panel held that this testimony satisfied the charge to a standard of clear and convincing evidence.  Accordingly, the Panel sustained the charged violation.

City of Providence v. Raymond Beausejour, C.A. No. T08-0149 (January 28, 2009).pdf