State v. KEOGHAN

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

State v. KEOGHAN

982 A.2d 156, 2009 R.I. LEXIS 118, 2009 WL 3734963

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedOctober 30, 2009

Docket2008-5-M.P.

StatusPublished

This text of 982 A.2d 156 (State v. KEOGHAN) 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

State v. KEOGHAN, 982 A.2d 156, 2009 R.I. LEXIS 118, 2009 WL 3734963 (R.I. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

On February 28, 2008, this Court granted the defendant Peter Keoghan’s petition for a writ of certiorari to review a District Court order which sustained the state’s appeal and reversed a decision of the Traffic Tribunal Appeals Panel (Appeals Panel). The Appeals Panel had affirmed a magistrate’s dismissal of the petitioner Keoghan’s breathalyzer refusal charge. At issue on certiorari is whether the District Court had jurisdiction to hear the state’s appeal from the Appeals Panel’s decision. This issue was recently decided in State v. Robinson, 972 A.2d 150 (R.I. 2009), where the Court held that the District Court lacks such jurisdiction. In light of Robinson, the state concedes that the District Court erred in this case. Upon our careful review of the certiorari petition, the state’s confession of error, and our opinion in Robinson, we agree.

Accordingly, the petition for certiorari is granted, the order entered by the District Court in this case is quashed, and the papers are remanded to the District Court.

Justice ROBINSON did not participate.

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

ORDER

On February 28, 2008, this Court granted the defendant Peter Keoghan’s petition for a writ of certiorari to review a District Court order which sustained the state’s appeal and reversed a decision of the Traffic Tribunal Appeals Panel (Appeals Panel). The Appeals Panel had affirmed a magistrate’s dismissal of the petitioner Keoghan’s breathalyzer refusal charge. At issue on certiorari is whether the District Court had jurisdiction to hear the state’s appeal from the Appeals Panel’s decision. This issue was recently decided in State v. Robinson, 972 A.2d 150 (R.I. 2009), where the Court held that the District Court lacks such jurisdiction. In light of Robinson, the state concedes that the District Court erred in this case. Upon our careful review of the certiorari petition, the state’s confession of error, and our opinion in Robinson, we agree.

Accordingly, the petition for certiorari is granted, the order entered by the District Court in this case is quashed, and the papers are remanded to the District Court.

Justice ROBINSON did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

982 A.2d 156, 2009 R.I. LEXIS 118, 2009 WL 3734963, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-keoghan-ri-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack