Good Driving Statute

Town of Glocester appealed a trial magistrate’s decision dismissing Defendant’s charged violations pursuant to § 31-41.1-7 (application for dismissal based on good driving record). The Glocester Police Department issued Defendant a citation in connection with a commercial vehicle. At trial, Defendant moved to dismiss the charged violations based on her good driving record pursuant to § 31-41.1-7. The trial magistrate interpreted the statute to mean that only enumerated violations may be excluded from the good driving statute’s protection. The trial magistrate concluded that none of the exclusions prohibiting dismissal applied to Defendant. On appeal, Town of Glocester argued that the trial magistrate erred because the charged violations were ineligible for dismissal under the good driving statute since the violations were committed in connection with a commercial vehicle.

The good driving statute provides that any person who has had a driver’s license for more than three years, and who has not been charged with a traffic violation within the preceding three years, may move to dismiss the charged traffic violations. § 31-41.1-7(d) provides circumstances in which a violation may not be dismissed. Specifically, § 31-41.1-7(d)(7) provides that “[a]ny violation committed by a holder of a commercial license . . . or any violation committed.in a commercial vehicle . . . by an operator who does not hold a commercial license” may not be dismissed under the good driving statute. As such, the Appeals Panel held that the trial magistrate erred because the charged violations were not eligible for dismissal under the good driving statute. Accordingly, the Appeals Panel reversed the dismissal and remanded the matter for further proceedings.

State of Rhode Island v. Jessica Hopkins, No. T18-0018 (February 28, 2019).pdf

Good Driving Statute

The Defendant appealed the trial judge’s decision sustaining the charged violation of G.L. 1956 §31-15-11 (laned roadways).  The Defendant maintained she was not informed that by going to trial, her ability to use the “good driver” statute would become void.  However, the Defendant was asked both prior to trial and again by the Appeals Panel if she wanted the violation dismissed pursuant to R.I.G.L. §31-41.1-7 and each time she declined. Therefore, the Panel found that she was properly informed of the availability of the good driver statute.  The Panel reversed and dismissed the charged violation on other grounds.

State of Rhode Island v. Deborah Saulnier, C.A. No. T14-0062 (December 15, 2015).pdf

Good Driving Statute

The Defendant appealed the trial magistrate’s decision to sustain the charged violation of R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-14-2 (prima facie limits). Prior to trial the Defendant sought dismissal of the violation pursuant to R.I.G.L. 1956 § 31-41.1-7, the “good driving statute,” which entitles a Defendant to a dismissal if the Defendant has not received a traffic violation within the previous three years. The Defendant argued that the trial judge’s decision was clearly erroneous where he refused to dismiss the violation due to the Defendant’s “non-moving” inspection sticker violation within the previous three years. The Panel concluded that the phrase “traffic offenses” in the good driving statute included only moving violations, holding that the good driving statute does not reach non-moving motor vehicle violations. Accordingly, the Panel reversed the trial judge’s decision and dismissed the charged violation after applying the good driving statute.

Town of Cumberland v. Freddie Rodriguez, C.A. M08-0016 (October 22, 2008).pdf