For eight years, Mary Stanley Guerin has also dedicated the majority of her practice to DUI Defense. Prior to practice, Mary clerked for Bob for two years, and has been honored to have learned from the best in Central Georgia. In 2009, she was asked to sit on a panel to address Ethics, where she and a prosecutor and judges took questions from attorneys as part of a continuing legal education course. In addition to DUI defense, Ms. Guerin handles other felony and misdemeanor cases. Ms. Guerin believes that in addition to skill and knowledge of the law, it is critical to know every client’s history and goals for the case and that listening may be an attorney’s greatest strength.
- Georgia Bar Association
- Macon Bar Association
- Georgia Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
- Macon Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
- B.A., University of Alabama, 1999
- J.D., Walter F. George School of Law, Mercer University, 2003
- Special Training: Bill Daniel Trial Advocacy Program, trained in DUI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing, blood alcohol testing
Mary has won a DUI trial where the Defendant blew a .167 on the Intoxilyzer and showed manifestations of impairment by failing the “eye test”, the walk and turn, and the one leg stand tests, after arguing that an interferant erroneously inflated the test result, and that any impairment seen on the video was the result of medical issues, rather than alcohol. The jury came back with a not guilty verdict in less than thirty minutes.
She has successfully blocked the State from using state administered tests against her clients, including the breath test and the “scientific” horizontal gaze nystagmus test, more commonly known as “the eye test”. These accomplishments are the direct result of her training, skill and knowledge of both the law and science behind DUI cases.
She has cross-examined a field sobriety instructor who was believed to be one of the best DUI detection officers in a conservative county south of Macon, in which the officer did not have a video. Many times, in these cases, it comes down to an officer’s word versus the client’s word, all too often with the officer’s word being trusted. Mary; however, used the officer/field sobriety instructor as her own witness. After having the officer testify and demonstrate the field sobriety instructions, Mary made the officer/ field sobriety instructor admit that many of the clues of impairment he observed were a result of his poor instructions and demonstration. Ultimately, the jury found her client not guilty.
In a trial scenario, a client needs a lawyer who is not just trained in the areas of field sobriety, but knows how to use the training, and listen to the arresting officer’s answers. Most importantly, a client needs a lawyer that not only pays attention to details, but can articulate in a convincing and meaningful way why those details matter.