
    The State, Appellant, v. Ashcraft.
    Criminal Practice: right of state to appeal. An appeal does not lie in behalf of the state in a criminal case where the defendant is discharged under Revised Statutes, section 1923, because he has not been brought to trial before the end of the third term of the court held after the finding of the indictment.
    
      Appeal from Carter Circuit Court. — Hon. John G. Wear, Judge.
    Appeal dismissed.
    
      B. 'G. Boone, Attorney General, for appellant.
    Section 1923, Revised Statutes, was intended to operate to discharge a defendant only where the state had shown laches for three successive terms after the finding of the indictment. State v. Huling, 21 Mo. 464, 471. The record does not show that the state was guilty of such laches as to authorize the trial court to sustain the motion to'discharge the defendant.
    
      ■S. M. C hapman for respondent. •
   Sherwood, J.

On motion of defendant, she was discharged because not brought to trial before the end of the third term of the court in which her case was pending. ■ R. S., sec. 1923.

The correctness of this action of the trial court cannot be considered, for the reason that the state is not allowed an appeal in this sort of a case. The state is only allowed an appeal in any criminal prosecution, where the indictment is quashed, adjudged insufficient on demurrer, or where judgment thereon is arrested. R. S., secs. 1985, 1986; State v. Bollinger, 69 Mo. 577.

Therefore, appeal dismissed.

All concur, Ray, J., absent.  