In Gajewski v. State, 944 S.W.2d, 450 (Tex. App.--Houston 14th Dist. 1997, no pet.), the appellant argued there was no evidence that his driving behavior affected the safety of other motorists, and thus, his weaving did not violate any traffic laws. Id. at 452. At the motion to suppress hearing, the officer testified he observed appellant cross the double line of traffic "two or three times" with about one third of the vehicle crossing the line. Id. at 453. He specifically stated the "sole basis" for the stop was the appellant's weaving between the lanes of traffic despite no other cars in the area at the time. Id. The court determined: "There is no requirement that a particular statute is violated in order to give rise to reasonable suspicion. Although not an inherently illegal act, when the officer observed appellant's car weaving between traffic lanes, reasonable suspicion existed to believe appellant was driving the motor vehicle while intoxicated, or that some activity out of the ordinary is or has occurred, so as to justify the temporary stop of defendant's car." Id. at 452. The court also rejected appellant's argument that because no other vehicles were in the immediate vicinity when he changed lanes, he did not violate section 545.060. Id. at 453. It reasoned that although the absence of other nearby cars may be a defense to a traffic citation, it does not negate a stop based on reasonable suspicion that the driver has lost control of his mental and physical faculties by the ingestion of drugs or alcohol. Id. "Traffic laws are designed to protect not only the safety of other persons in other vehicles, but also the safety of the driver in question." Id. The court concluded that because the appellant's own behavior was telling the officer he was unable to safely operate a motor vehicle, as evidenced by weaving across the center line three different times, appellant was a danger to himself and others. Thus, the trial court did not err in granting the motion to suppress. Id.