Opinion
47429.
SUBMITTED SEPTEMBER 11, 1972.
DECIDED SEPTEMBER 19, 1972.
Possession of gambling devices. Bartow Superior Court. Before Judge Davis.
Ben Lancaster, for appellant.
David N. Vaughan, Jr., District Attorney, for appellee.
The defendants appeal their convictions and sentences for possession of gambling devices and possession of more than one quart of alcoholic liquor in a dry county.
Defendants' motion to suppress the evidence of whiskey and gambling devices, seized under a search warrant, and testimony related thereto, was overruled. Defendants contended that the warrant was illegal, there being no probable cause for the issuance of the warrant because the affidavit did not contain, inter alia, sufficient statements as to when the informers obtained the information reported by the informers, or when the informers reported the information reported to the informers or a sufficient showing that the information reported by the informers related to criminal activity closely related in time to the date of the affidavit. The affidavit does not set forth the time the informers obtained the information, the time the informers reported the information, or the time the evidence was in the possession of the defendants. This court has repeatedly held that a "prime element in the concept of probable cause is the time of the occurrence of the facts relied upon." Fowler v. State, 121 Ga. App. 22, 23 ( 172 S.E.2d 447); Windsor v. State, 122 Ga. App. 767, 768 ( 178 S.E.2d 751); Gilliam v. State, 124 Ga. App. 843 ( 186 S.E.2d 290). The trial court erred in overruling the defendants' motion to suppress.
Judgment reversed. Hall, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.