Plaintiff in error was convicted on a chairge' that he did' Unlawfully ;b'ávé’;ih' his- possession a quantity of intoxicating' liquor, to wit,- -whisky;-and- iri accordance with the verdict hf the jury"he was sentenced- to pay a fine of $50,-and- to confinement- ih -tlie: county jail for 3© days.‘'To reverse'the,j'udgmenbhéi-app’éáísV! *'< v

The first, error assigned fop.rejyer^al.'is the .admission of evidence procured under a search warrant issued upon an Affidavit AVhieh was' hot sufficient to give the' justice of the peace jurisdiction to-issue. !

The record sustains this assignment.'By numerous decisions of this court it is held that liquor obtained by a search of defendant’s premises under a search warrant issued without authority of law for the sole purpose of obtaining evidence against him in violation of the Bill of Rights, § 30, guaranteeing security of- the people in their right to be exempt in their persons, houses, papers, and effects from unreasonable searches and seizure, is inadmissible against him. Russell v. State, 25 Okla. Cr. 423, 221 P. 113; Foster v. State, 27 Okla. Cr. 270, 226 P. 602; Cudjo v. State, 34 Okla. Cr. 199, 245 P. 906.

'■ít'alsd; appea!fs‘!tkat,;the evidencej^s' ,'ihkufficient to sustáin the allegations of the information. The judgment of the lower court is therefore reversed.