By Deandra Grant & Griffin Grant

Welcome to The Defense File where we examine the criminal cases of public figures through the lens of Texas criminal law. Each entry looks at what happened in court, what the defense argued, and what a defendant would have faced (and how they might have been defended) if the same facts had occurred in Texas.

Most DUI/DWI cases look similar at the surface: driver pulled over, breath test administered, number above the legal limit. What distinguishes them legally is the alleged BAC. Cleveland blew 0.178. Both Georgia and Texas treat that number as significantly worse than a 0.08 reading but they do it in different ways. In Georgia, 0.15+ is an aggravating factor that drives sentencing upward within the same misdemeanor offense and triggers mandatory alcohol treatment and an extended license suspension. In Texas, 0.15+ is a separate offense classification that elevates the charge from a Class B to a Class A misdemeanor and closes the door on HB 3582 deferred adjudication. Either way, the specific number matters.

The Incident

On February 12, 2025, at approximately 10:25 p.m., a Baldwin County, Georgia deputy pulled over Cleveland’s black Ford F-250 after observing it swerving and nearly veering into a ditch. The deputy noted the smell of alcohol and observed Cleveland’s glossy eyes. Cleveland told the officer he had consumed approximately three to four beers at a local country club earlier that evening.

Cleveland failed field sobriety tests. His breath test registered 0.178 which is more than double Georgia’s 0.08% legal limit. He received two citations: DUI and failure to maintain lane.

The case remains pending in Baldwin County, Georgia, as of June 2025. Cleveland was also released by the Baltimore Ravens as a free agent after the 2024 season, though the team has not commented on the arrest.

The Georgia Analysis: A 0.178 First-Offense DUI

Georgia’s DUI statute is O.C.G.A. § 40-6-391. A first DUI within ten years is a misdemeanor with a single statutory penalty range, but the BAC drives where in that range the sentence lands.

First-offense Georgia DUI — statutory minimum and maximum:

  • Statutory range of 10 days to 12 months. When the BAC is 0.08 or greater, the judge must impose a minimum 24 hours of actual jail time; the remainder of the 10-day statutory minimum is suspendable.
  • $300 to $1,000, plus state surcharges and assessments that typically add roughly 50% on top of the base fine.
  • 12 months, less any time actually served. The probation period is statutory and cannot be shortened.
  • Community service. A minimum of 40 hours for first offenders 21 and over.
  • DUI Risk Reduction Program. Mandatory completion (the Georgia equivalent of a DUI education course).
  • Clinical evaluation. A mandatory substance-abuse evaluation, plus completion of any treatment recommended by the evaluator.
  • License suspension. Standard first-offense administrative suspension is up to 12 months, with a limited driving permit potentially available after a waiting period.

How 0.178 Changes the Picture in Georgia

Georgia does not have a separate statutory offense for high-BAC DUI the way Texas does, but a BAC over 0.15 is treated as an aggravating factor that pushes the sentence toward the harsh end of the statutory range. As Greg Willis of Willis Law Firm explains in his BAC-and-penalties article, when a defendant’s BAC “surpasses 0.15%, the consequences become even more severe. Offenders may face higher fines, a longer probation period, mandatory completion of an alcohol treatment program, and a more extended driver’s license suspension, often ranging from one to five years.”

In practice, Cleveland’s 0.178 means a Georgia court is likely to impose:

  • A fine at or near the $1,000 statutory ceiling, plus surcharges;
  • A longer and more structured probation than a borderline 0.08 case;
  • A mandatory clinical evaluation that, given the BAC, is highly likely to recommend a formal alcohol treatment program (not just DUI education);
  • A meaningful jail component beyond the 24-hour mandatory minimum, particularly given the swerving observed by the deputy; and
  • An extended driver’s license consequence beyond the standard 12-month suspension.

And One Critical Georgia Point: First Offender Discharge Is Not Available

Georgia’s First Offender Act, O.C.G.A. § 42-8-60, lets eligible first-time offenders avoid a conviction by successfully completing probation. It does not apply to a misdemeanor DUI. O.C.G.A. § 40-6-391(f) expressly bars the First Offender Act and the general misdemeanor probation provisions of O.C.G.A. § 17-10-3 from applying to anyone convicted of DUI. A Georgia DUI conviction is permanent on the record and cannot be expunged or restricted under any of Georgia’s ordinary record-clearing mechanisms.

The Texas Analysis: 0.178 Crosses Two Lines That Matter

Texas treats 0.15+ as a charge enhancement, not a sentencing enhancement. The 0.15 threshold elevates the offense from a Class B misdemeanor to a Class A misdemeanor and eliminates the HB 3582 deferred adjudication option that would otherwise be available to a first-time offender. At 0.178, a Texas defendant cannot get deferred, cannot get a dismissal through that pathway, and faces a permanent DWI conviction on their record if they plead guilty.

Texas’s Tiered DWI Structure: The 0.15 Line

Texas Penal Code §49.04 defines DWI as operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated. The base first-offense charge is a Class B misdemeanor carrying a mandatory minimum of 72 hours in county jail, up to 180 days maximum, and a fine up to $2,000.

Texas Penal Code §49.04(d) creates an elevated charge: when it is shown at trial that the defendant had a blood alcohol concentration of 0.15 or greater at the time of the analysis, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor. The Class A misdemeanor carries:

  • Maximum: 1 year in county jail.
  • Fine: Up to $4,000.
  • Mandatory ignition interlock: Required as a condition of bond and probation.

Cleveland’s 0.178% is 0.028 points above the Texas threshold. In Texas, that 0.028 matters enormously. The charge is not a Class B misdemeanor. It is a Class A misdemeanor. The fine ceiling doubles from $2,000 to $4,000. The maximum jail exposure doubles from 180 days to one year. And the most significant consequence: the HB 3582 deferred adjudication option is unavailable (unless the prosecutor agrees to drop the 0.15 enhancement).

HB 3582 Deferred Adjudication: Closed at 0.178

Texas’s 2019 amendment to the DWI laws (HB 3582, codified at CCP Art. 42A.102) created a pathway to deferred adjudication community supervision for first-offense DWI defendants. Under the statute, a defendant who has no prior DWI convictions and whose recorded BAC was below 0.15 is eligible to seek deferred adjudication. Successful completion results in dismissal rather than a final conviction, with the charge becoming eligible for non-disclosure (sealing) in most circumstances. Note: a prior DWI deferred adjudication can be used for enhancement purposes if the person is later charged with another DWI.

This option is not available to Cleveland in Texas. The statute expressly requires a BAC below 0.15. Cleveland’s 0.178 is above that threshold. A Texas prosecutor would not offer, and a Texas court could not grant, deferred adjudication on a first-offense DWI with a recorded BAC of 0.178 unless the prosecutor agreed to drop the 0.15 enhancement and proceed at the Class B level. If Cleveland were to plead guilty to a Texas DWI at 0.178, the conviction would be permanent. It cannot be expunged. The record follows him for life, appearing in every background check any team, employer, or licensing authority runs.

The Pharmacokinetics of “Three to Four Beers”

Cleveland told the deputy he had consumed approximately three to four beers at a country club. Cleveland weighs 343 pounds. The relationship between body weight and blood alcohol concentration is a pharmacokinetic calculation that most people understand intuitively (larger people generally reach lower BAC levels from the same amount of alcohol) but the specific numbers are worth examining.

A rough pharmacokinetic estimate for a 343-pound man consuming three to four standard drinks over an evening: approximately 0.03 to 0.06 BAC, depending on consumption timing, food intake, individual metabolism, and when the last drink was consumed relative to the breath test. Three to four beers, for a man Cleveland’s size, would not typically produce a 0.178 BAC.

The gap between the self-reported drink count and the measured result is a defense argument. Either Cleveland consumed substantially more than three to four drinks and minimized his consumption to the officer (which is the prosecution’s interpretation) or the measurement is incorrect, or individual metabolic and absorption factors produced an unusually elevated result from a limited number of drinks. The defense examines the breathalyzer’s calibration records, the 15- to 20-minute pre-test observation period compliance, and whether any interferent substances could have elevated the reading.

In a Texas DWI case at 0.178, the defense incentive to challenge the breath test result is particularly strong because successfully bringing the result below 0.15 (even if still above 0.08) opens the HB 3582 deferred adjudication pathway that is otherwise foreclosed. A result of 0.149 versus 0.178 is the difference between a permanent conviction and a deferred adjudication that ends in dismissal and is eligible for non-disclosure.

The Breath Test Challenges Available in Texas

The Intoxilyzer 9000 is the breath testing instrument used across Texas. Its calibration records, the pre-test observation period, the partition ratio assumption of 2100:1, and the instrument’s margin of measurement uncertainty are all subject to examination. In a case where the result is near a statutory threshold (particularly the 0.15 Class A enhancement line) these challenges have direct consequence for which charge the defendant faces.

Specific challenges in a near-threshold case include:

  • Calibration records. When was the instrument last calibrated? What were the results of the control tests administered before and after Cleveland’s sample?
  • The observation period. Texas DPS protocol requires the breath-test operator to observe the subject for 15 minutes (commonly extended to 20) before administering the test, to ensure the subject did not burp, belch, or regurgitate oral content that could introduce mouth alcohol into the sample. Any deviation in the observation period affects the reliability of the result.
  • Partition ratio variability. The Intoxilyzer converts breath alcohol to an estimated blood alcohol using a fixed 2100:1 ratio. The actual ratio varies across the population from approximately 1100:1 to 3400:1. For a person with a lower-than-average ratio, the Intoxilyzer overstates BAC. At a result of 0.178, the question of whether the true BAC was actually above 0.15 or whether the instrument’s fixed ratio produced an inflated reading is a legitimate forensic argument.
  • Interferent substances. Certain medical conditions and substances can produce elevated Intoxilyzer readings that do not reflect actual blood alcohol concentration. A defense examination of Cleveland’s medical history and any medications would evaluate whether any interferent is present.

The Stop: Failure to Maintain Lane

The deputy pulled Cleveland over after observing his truck swerving and nearly veering into a ditch. Failure to maintain a single lane is a traffic violation that provides the basis for a lawful stop. In Texas, this is the Article 38.23 analysis starting point: was the stop lawful?

On the facts as described (observed swerving and nearly leaving the roadway) the stop appears constitutionally sound. A driver who is observed nearly veering into a ditch provides reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop. This is not a case where the suppression argument is strong. The investigation that followed the stop (the officer’s observations, the field sobriety tests, the breath test) is where the defense work is concentrated, not the stop itself.

Georgia vs. Texas at 0.178: The Honest Comparison

Both states punish 0.15+ DUI more harshly than a borderline 0.08 case. They do it differently.

  • In Georgia, 178 is a first-offense misdemeanor DUI with the same statutory range as any other first DUI, but the high BAC drives the sentence toward the top of that range (maximum fines, longer probation, mandatory clinical treatment beyond the standard Risk Reduction Program, more meaningful jail time beyond the 24-hour mandatory minimum, and a longer practical license consequence). The DUI Risk Reduction Program, clinical evaluation, and 40-hour minimum community service are all required regardless of BAC.
  • In Texas, 178 is a first-offense Class A misdemeanor under §49.04(d) instead of the Class B that a sub-0.15 first DWI would carry. The maximum jail doubles to one year. The maximum fine doubles to $4,000. Ignition interlock is mandatory as a condition of bond and probation. And the HB 3582 deferred adjudication path that exists for sub-0.15 first DWIs is foreclosed.

The shared truth: in both states, the conviction is permanent. Georgia bars DUI from First Offender Act discharge under O.C.G.A. § 40-6-391(f). Texas bars deferred adjudication at 0.15+ under HB 3582. A Cleveland-style 0.178 first-offense conviction in either state is a forever-record offense.

Where Texas is actually more forgiving than Georgia: the sub-0.15 path. In Texas, a first-time offender who tests below 0.15 can earn a dismissal and non-disclosure through HB 3582 deferred adjudication. Georgia has no equivalent for any DUI BAC, low or high. That is why, in a Texas defense at 0.178, the forensic challenge to the breath test (calibration, partition ratio, observation period) is so consequential. Pulling the reading below 0.15 in Texas does not just reduce the sentence; it reopens a path to dismissal that does not exist in Georgia.

What This Case Illustrates

The Cleveland case is the clearest illustration in this series of why the specific BAC number matters in DWI defense in either state, but for different reasons.

In Georgia, 0.178 vs. 0.118 is the difference between sentencing at the top of the statutory range with mandatory alcohol treatment and a much harsher license consequence, versus sentencing in the middle of the range with the standard education program. The conviction is permanent either way.

In Texas, 0.149 vs. 0.178 is the difference between a Class B misdemeanor with deferred adjudication available, a potential dismissal at the end of supervision, and a path to non-disclosure versus a Class A misdemeanor with no deferred adjudication available, a permanent conviction if pleaded guilty, and a record that enhances every future DWI.

The breath test result near any penalty threshold is always worth forensic examination, because the margin of instrument error, the partition ratio variability, and the observation period compliance are all factors that can affect whether a result falls above or below a statutory line that carries significant legal consequences. In a Texas case at 0.178, that examination is not optional. It is the case.

Sources

 

The Defense File is an educational series. This case remains pending. All Texas analysis is hypothetical and does not constitute legal advice about any specific case.

 

If you are facing DWI charges in Texas, call (214) 225-7117 for a free, confidential consultation. Or schedule online at texasdwisite.com.