“From the Record of Appeal, the Appellant was arraigned for his trial before the trial court in July, 2008 and eventually, the trial ended with delivery of judgment by that court on the 28^th July, 2010. The trial of the Appellant therefore lasted for a period of two (2) years; i.e. from July, 2008 when he was arraigned, to July, 2010 when the judgment of the trial court was delivered in which he was convicted. The trial of the Appellant within a period of two (2) years from arraignment to judgment was in strict compliance and accordance with the provisions of section 36 (4) of the Constitution guaranteeing a criminal trial within a reasonable time and cannot reasonably be said to have been delayed or prolonged to his disadvantage or prejudice so as to occasion a miscarriage of justice. It was the Appellant, in the exercise of his constitutional right of appeal guaranteed under the provisions of Section 241 (1) (a) that filed an appeal at the court below against the decision/judgment of the trial court, vide the Notice of Appeal dated the 19^th but filed on the 26 October, 2010, which appears at page 57 (down) of the Record of Appeal. The Appellant’s brief at the court below was filed out of time and deemed on the 13^th November, 2012 as shown at pages 92 – 93 of the Record of Appeal and it would be recalled that the judgment of the court below was delivered on the 11^th April, 2013; i.e. five (5) months later, when the order for re-trial was made by that court. Undoubtedly, although the Appellant was entitled to the right to appeal against a decision by the court below; which, includes any order made by that court; see Section 318 of the Constitution, the re-trial would have been concluded before the trial court by now going by the period the initial trial lasted in that court. Again, by the record of the period of time the Appellant’s appeal at the court below lasted, a further appeal to that court would have been disposed of by now; in the year 2022. In the above premises, there are no special circumstances in the Appellant’s case which would render a re-trial of the Appellant as ordered by the court below, oppressive.” Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, JSC in JEREMIAH JOSEPH V. THE STATE (2022-LCER-46642-SC) at Pp. 20 – 22; Paras. F-G.