JUDGE INVALIDATES WARRANT IN DRUG, GUN CASE

Facing Up To 26.5 Years, Cedarburg Man Has All Counts Dismissed

OZAUKEE COUNTY - Four felony drug charges and a felony firearm charge
against a town of Cedarburg man were dismissed last week after a
Washington County judge declared the search warrant invalid.

Peter Huiras, 50, was charged with manufacture/delivery of marijuana,
felony possession of marijuana, possession of cocaine, possession of
hallucinogenic psylocybin mushrooms and being a felon in possession of
a firearm following a search warrant executed at his home by the
Ozaukee County Drug Task Force.

Huiras was convicted of felony possession with intent to deliver
marijuana in Waukesha County in 1990, making the firearm possession a
felony.

In his house, officers found 626 grams of marijuana, equipment for
growing marijuana, 33 grams of mushrooms and a gram of cocaine in
addition to a 20 gauge shotgun and shotgun shells.

The house was searched after an undercover Sheriff's deputy observed a
wooden box in Huiras' house containing approximately a quarter-ounce
of marijuana.

Huiras was defended in the case by his father's law firm, Huiras,
Farrell and Antoine, S.C. Huiras' father is attorney and local
philanthropist Ralph Huiras. Attorney William Farrell was his lead
counsel and was assisted in the motion to suppress the search warrant
by the Waukesha-based law firm, The Schroeder Group, S.C.

The case was transferred to Washington County Judge Andrew
Gonring.

In the successful portion of the motion to suppress the search
warrant, the attorneys argued that the warrant was overly broad in its
scope of the area to be searched and in the items to be searched for
and thus violated the Constitution's Fourth Amendment.

"It is difficult to comprehend how the alleged observance of
one-quarter ounce of marijuana permits a full-scale search for items
that can only be described as associated with a broad-scale controlled
substances manufacturing operation," the motion to suppress states.

In its reply, the district attorney's office wrote that the warrant
was valid based on the observed marijuana and that even if portions of
the seized items were not properly authorized under the warrant, the
remainder of the items were legitimately seized.

Huiras' attorneys also argued that the warrant was invalid because the
affidavits that spelled out the probable cause the warrant was based
on were not signed and dated until after the warrant was executed.
District Attorney Sandy Williams said the judge did not agree that the
warrant was invalid on those grounds, however.

Although the search warrant process relies on a certain amount of
"form" language - "In (the deputy's) experience as a narcotics officer
investigating the distribution and sales of illegal substances, (the
deputy) has found that subjects involved in the sale and distribution
of narcotics usually have evidence of the crime in their residence" -
Williams said the ruling will not require the Sheriff's Department to
reevaluate its warrant applications.