
    Jacob Shannon v. The State.
    An appeal does not lie in criminal cases until after final conviction. (Note 68.)
    Note 68. — Burrell -u. The State. 16 T., 147; State v. Paschal, 22 T., 584; Calvin v. The State, 23 T.,577: Nathan v. The State, 28 T., 326; Mayfield v. The State,40 T., 289; see Nelson v. The State, 32 T„ 71; Hoffee v. The State, 32 T., 388; Fulcher v. The State, 38 T., 505.
    Appeal from Montgomery. The appellant was indicted and found guilty under the 67th section of the act concerning crimes and punishments. He moved for a new trial, which was granted liim on payment of costs. From this judgment he appealed.
    
      A. Hemphill, for appellant.
    
      Attorney General, for appellee.
   Wheeler, J.

'The appellant complains of the terms on which a new trial was awarded him; but this was a mere incidental order, from which no appeal lies. We have heretofore decided that an appeal does not lie until final judgment in a civil case, and the same rule applies in criminal cases. The act regulating appeals hy the accused in criminal cases evidently contemplates the exercise of this right only after conviction. (Hart. Dig., arts. 476, 477, 478.)

It is very clear that a party cannot appeal from a judgmeut awarding a new trial in his favor and granted at his instance.

Appeal dismissed.  