In McKinney v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 519, McKinney was arrested at 2:25 a.m. California Highway Patrol (CHP) Officer David Raleigh, who arrested McKinney, prepared a report, stating that he observed McKinney straddling two lanes of Highway 101 before pulling him over and arresting him. Breath tests conducted at 3:45 and 3:46 a.m. showed McKinney had a blood-alcohol level over the legal limit. Officer Raleigh did not indicate in the report what time he observed McKinney driving before the arrest. (McKinney, supra, 5 Cal.App.4th at pp. 521-522, 524.) On appeal, Division Two of this District found that the omission of the time of driving from Officer Raleigh's report did not constitute a "fatal gap" for purposes of the section 23152(b) presumption. The Court of Appeal observed that "according to the statement, there was no accident involved, nor did it list any other intervening event which might have created a lengthy interval between the officer's observation and the stop. The hearing officer was not constrained to consider only direct evidence but could draw inferences and deductions of fact from the facts before him. In the absence of any indication that there was a significant delay between the observation and the stop, and in view of the proximity between where the unusual driving was observed and the point where McKinney was stopped and arrested, the hearing officer could rationally infer that McKinney was driving in an inebriated condition shortly prior to the 2:25 a.m. arrest." ( McKinney, supra, at p. 524.)