Gemma v. State ex rel. Town of West Warwick

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Gemma v. State ex rel. Town of West Warwick

655 A.2d 254, 1995 R.I. LEXIS 65, 1995 WL 130755

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedMarch 9, 1995

DocketNo. 95-75-M.P.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 655 A.2d 254 (Gemma v. State ex rel. Town of West Warwick) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gemma v. State ex rel. Town of West Warwick, 655 A.2d 254, 1995 R.I. LEXIS 65, 1995 WL 130755 (R.I. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Petitioner in this case seeks a writ of certiorari to review a decision of an Administrative Adjudication Court appeals panel. The appeals panel has affirmed a hearing judge’s order sustaining a charge that petitioner had refused to submit to a chemical test in violation of G.L.1956 (1994 Reenactment) § 31-27-2.1, and petitioner challenges that ruling as erroneous in several respects. After carefully reviewing the petitioner’s contentions, we disagree.

The appeals panel in this case properly addressed all of the issues submitted to that tribunal. We are of the opinion that the circumstances in which police encountered petitioner at the scene of this accident established reasonable grounds for the officer’s belief that petitioner was the operator of the vehicle that had struck the pedestrians in this case, and that he had operated the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. Further, under the circumstances of this case, Miranda warnings were not required prior to the administering of the field sobriety tests. Pennsylvania v. Bruder, 488 U.S. 9, 109 S.Ct. 205, 102 L.Ed.2d 172 (1988) per curiam. Finally, petitioner was adequately advised of the penalties he would incur if he refused to submit to a breathalyzer test.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of certio-rari is denied.

MURRAY, J., did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

Petitioner in this case seeks a writ of certiorari to review a decision of an Administrative Adjudication Court appeals panel. The appeals panel has affirmed a hearing judge’s order sustaining a charge that petitioner had refused to submit to a chemical test in violation of G.L.1956 (1994 Reenactment) § 31-27-2.1, and petitioner challenges that ruling as erroneous in several respects. After carefully reviewing the petitioner’s contentions, we disagree.

The appeals panel in this case properly addressed all of the issues submitted to that tribunal. We are of the opinion that the circumstances in which police encountered petitioner at the scene of this accident established reasonable grounds for the officer’s belief that petitioner was the operator of the vehicle that had struck the pedestrians in this case, and that he had operated the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. Further, under the circumstances of this case, Miranda warnings were not required prior to the administering of the field sobriety tests. Pennsylvania v. Bruder, 488 U.S. 9, 109 S.Ct. 205, 102 L.Ed.2d 172 (1988) per curiam. Finally, petitioner was adequately advised of the penalties he would incur if he refused to submit to a breathalyzer test.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of certio-rari is denied.

MURRAY, J., did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

655 A.2d 254, 1995 R.I. LEXIS 65, 1995 WL 130755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gemma-v-state-ex-rel-town-of-west-warwick-ri-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack