If you’ve recently been arrested for a DWI in Texas, you’re probably dealing with more than one legal headache. One of the first issues you’ll face—often before your criminal case moves forward—is an Administrative License Revocation (ALR) hearing. But what exactly is the purpose of this hearing? And perhaps more importantly, who has to prove what? Understanding the ALR hearing burden of proof is crucial to fighting for your driving privileges.
In this comprehensive breakdown, we’re going to walk you through the role of the ALR hearing in a DWI case, explain exactly what the burden of proof means in this context, and detail how both sides—especially the arresting officer and the accused—must present their case. We’ll break it down in a way that’s easy to follow, throw in some real-life examples, and highlight common mistakes to avoid. By the end, you’ll have a clear sense of how the ALR hearing burden of proof can make or break your ability to keep your license after a DWI arrest in Texas.
What Is an ALR Hearing?
A Civil Battle Over Your Right to Drive
An ALR (Administrative License Revocation) hearing is a civil administrative process that determines whether your driver’s license should be suspended following a DWI arrest. It’s not a criminal proceeding—meaning you’re not fighting for your freedom, but for your ability to drive.
There are two situations where an ALR hearing comes into play:
- You refused to submit to a breath or blood test after being arrested for DWI.
- You failed a breath or blood test (i.e., your BAC was 0.08% or higher).
In both scenarios, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) initiates an automatic suspension of your license. However, you have 15 days from the date of arrest to request an ALR hearing and contest that suspension.
Understanding the ALR hearing burden of proof is essential because it determines how hard DPS must work to suspend your license—and how much your attorney must challenge that effort.
What Does “Burden of Proof” Actually Mean?
The Heart of Every Legal Argument
The burden of proof refers to the legal obligation of one party to prove their claims or allegations. In criminal court, the burden is on the state to prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.” But in civil proceedings—like ALR hearings—the standard is much lower.
In an ALR hearing, the burden of proof falls on the Department of Public Safety (DPS). That means DPS has to present enough evidence to show that your license should be suspended under Texas law.
But unlike in criminal cases, the burden here is only a preponderance of the evidence—meaning “more likely than not.” So, if the hearing officer believes there’s even a 51% chance that you refused or failed the test legally, they can uphold the suspension.
Still, if DPS fails to meet its burden—even on a technicality—you win.
DPS Must Prove These Key Elements
What the State Has to Show
When it comes to the ALR hearing burden of proof, DPS is required to prove specific things based on whether the case involves a refusal or a failure:
If You Refused Testing:
- That there was reasonable suspicion or probable cause for the initial stop
- That there was probable cause to arrest you for DWI
- That you were properly asked to submit to testing
- That you refused testing after being warned of the consequences
If You Failed Testing:
- That there was reasonable suspicion or probable cause for the stop
- That you were legally arrested for DWI
- That you submitted to a test
- That the results showed a BAC of 0.08% or more
- That testing equipment was properly calibrated and administered
The ALR hearing burden of proof requires DPS to prove every one of these elements. If they miss even one—say, they can’t prove the arresting officer had probable cause—you may keep your license.
Real-World Example: Officer No-Show = Suspension Lifted
Let’s say Kevin, a 32-year-old teacher in Dallas, was pulled over for failing to signal a lane change. The officer claimed he smelled alcohol and arrested Kevin for DWI after he refused a breath test. Kevin requested an ALR hearing within 15 days.
At the hearing, DPS submitted the officer’s report—but the officer failed to appear for cross-examination, and the report lacked key details about the probable cause. Since DPS didn’t meet its burden, the hearing officer dismissed the license suspension.
In this case, the ALR hearing burden of proof wasn’t met, and Kevin avoided a 180-day suspension.
Your Right to Challenge the Evidence
It’s Not Just About What DPS Proves—It’s What You Disprove
Once DPS presents its case, your attorney has the chance to cross-examine the arresting officer and contest any part of the evidence. This is where having a skilled DWI defense attorney really matters.
Common defense strategies include:
- Arguing the officer lacked probable cause for the stop
- Challenging the accuracy or maintenance of breathalyzer machines
- Questioning whether you were properly informed of the consequences of refusal
- Showing that the field sobriety tests were improperly administered
This is especially important in refusal cases, where your refusal must be knowing and voluntary. If the arresting officer failed to clearly explain the consequences—or did so in a confusing or rushed way—you might have grounds to win.
So while the ALR hearing burden of proof lies with DPS, your side isn’t just there to listen. You can—and should—poke holes in their story.
The Role of the Arresting Officer
Their Report Matters—But So Does Their Testimony
The arresting officer’s role in an ALR hearing is central to whether DPS meets its burden. While DPS can sometimes win with paperwork alone, their case is much stronger when the officer testifies in person.
Why? Because your attorney can:
- Ask the officer to explain every step of the stop and arrest
- Identify inconsistencies or missing details
- Catch memory lapses that weaken the state’s case
- Undermine the “reasonable suspicion” or “probable cause” claim
If the officer doesn’t show up—or if their report is vague or incomplete—DPS might struggle to meet the ALR hearing burden of proof, giving you a real chance to win.
What Happens If DPS Fails to Meet the Burden?
Your License Stays in Your Hands
If the hearing officer determines that DPS failed to meet its burden, they’ll issue a decision stating that your driver’s license will not be suspended. This doesn’t erase the DWI arrest or affect your criminal case, but it’s a major win.
Avoiding license suspension helps you:
- Keep your job (especially if driving is required)
- Maintain normal daily routines like school pickups or errands
- Avoid costly fees for occupational licenses or reinstatement
And perhaps most importantly, beating the ALR hearing often gives your defense attorney more leverage in your criminal case. A win here weakens the prosecutor’s confidence and can open the door to better plea deals or even dismissal
What Happens If DPS Meets the Burden?
The Suspension Begins—But You Still Have Options
If DPS meets the ALR hearing burden of proof, your license will be suspended. The duration depends on whether you refused or failed the test and whether you’ve had previous offenses.
Suspension Lengths:
- Refusal, first offense: 180 days
- Refusal, second offense: 2 years
- Failure (BAC ≥ 0.08), first offense: 90 days
- Failure, second offense: 1 year
But even if you lose, you’re not out of options. You can:
- Apply for an occupational license (to drive for work, school, and essential needs)
- Appeal the hearing decision in district court
- Use the ALR transcript to help build your criminal defense
This is why understanding the ALR hearing burden of proof is key—not just for winning the hearing, but for planning your overall strategy.
ALR Hearing vs. Criminal DWI Trial
Different Processes, Different Proof
It’s easy to confuse an ALR hearing with a criminal DWI trial, but they follow completely separate legal paths. An ALR hearing is a civil proceeding handled by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and focuses solely on the potential suspension of your driver’s license. In contrast, a DWI trial is a criminal case prosecuted by the local district attorney, with the goal of determining guilt and imposing criminal penalties if convicted. The burden of proof in each process is also different: in an ALR hearing, the state only needs to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence—essentially showing that it’s more likely than not that the offense occurred. In a criminal trial, however, the standard is much higher: beyond a reasonable doubt. Importantly, winning or losing at one stage doesn’t guarantee the same outcome at the other. However, testimony and evidence introduced during the ALR hearing—especially statements made by the arresting officer—can still play a key role in the criminal case that follows.
Real-Life Scenario: Saved by the Details
Maria, a 27-year-old nurse in San Antonio, failed a breath test with a BAC of 0.09%. DPS sought suspension.
At her ALR hearing, her attorney questioned the officer about probable cause. Under pressure, the officer admitted he observed no erratic driving—only “nervousness.”
Further questioning revealed the breathalyzer machine had not been calibrated within the required timeframe. Because of these issues, DPS failed to satisfy the ALR hearing burden of proof.
Maria kept her license. That success later helped her secure a favorable outcome in her criminal case.
Final Thoughts on ALR Hearing Burden of Proof
The ALR hearing burden of proof represents more than a technical legal concept. It defines your opportunity to fight back immediately after a DWI arrest.
DPS must prove its case. If they cannot, you keep your license. Even if they succeed, the hearing may expose weaknesses that benefit you later.
Treat the ALR hearing as the first strategic opportunity—not a side issue. When you understand how the burden of proof works, you gain leverage. And in DWI defense, leverage changes everything.
