Trial counsel was deficient for failing to effectively impeach the officer’s testimony that Fullmer failed to stop in front of a stop line because the intersection in question didn’t have a stop line; however, there were multiple other observations the officer made that justified the traffic stop even in the absence of the stop line violation (e.g., extremely slow driving, driving down the middle of a two lane road, weaving in her lane), so Fullmer wasn’t prejudiced. (¶¶4-7, 11, 14).
Nor did the officer’s inaccurate testimony about the stop line violation render all of his testimony incredible. Credibility was for the trial court, and the trial court appears to have supported its fact-finding in a rational manner. (¶12).