Evans moved to dismiss a petition alleging that he was a sexually violent predator (SVP) because it had not been timely prosecuted under Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310 et seq. The trial court denied his motion and the jury found him to be an SVP. The appellate court again rejected the argument regarding timely prosecution, finding that section 583.310 does not apply to special proceedings such as SVP commitments. Even if it did apply to SVP proceedings, application of mandatory dismissal statutes would be inconsistent with the character of SVP proceedings. And even if discretion had been exercised under that section, the court did not abuse its discretion because some of the continuances were a product of changes of attorneys and court congestion.