
    Jordan Williams, plaintiff in error, vs. The State of Georgia, defendant in error.
    The testimony of the chief witness for the State, as it appears in the rec? ord, leaving the question wholly uncertain whether the blinds to the windows of the house charged to have been broken into, were closed so as to show that there was such a breaking as is necessary to constitute burglary, when taken in connection with the apparent uncertainty of the witness as to the identity of the accused, makes this a proper case, in the opinion of this court, for a new trial.
    Criminal law. New trial. Before Judge Gibson. Richmond Superior Court. October Term, 1873.
    This case turns exclusively upon the testimony. To make any report beyond what is contained in the above head-note would illustrate' no principal of law.
    S. F. Webb, for plaintiff in error.
    Davenport Jackson, solicitor general, by Jackson & Clarke, for the state.
   Trippe, Judge.

The-record in this case may not possibly set out with exact correctness the testimony of the chief witness for the prosecution. Certain it is that, as it appears in the record, it is wholly uncertain whether the blinds to the windows of the house charged to have been broken into were closed, so as to show that there was such a breaking as is necessary to constitute burglary. There is no difficulty, nor was there any disagreement on the argument of the case, as to what the law is upon this point. The testimony, as it is in the record, on this fact, when taken in connection with the apparent uncertainty of the same witness as to the identity of the defendant, makes this a proper case, in the opinion of this court, for another investigation.

New trial granted.  