Appellant filed a motion to dismiss based on a denial of his right to a speedy trial, where there was a five-month delay between the filing of the felony complaint and appellant’s arraignment for a new “second strike” offense in Santa Clara County. Due to the delay, appellant had already served a sentence in Alameda County for a probation violation involving the new offense. The trial court granted the motion, and the prosecutor appealed. The appellate court affirmed the order dismissing the charges. Appellant demonstrated prejudice because under the Three Strikes law, the trial court could have sentenced appellant to concurrent sentences if it dismissed his prior strike pursuant to section 1385. The possibility that a defendant might receive a sentence even partially concurrent constitutes prejudice. Further, the prosecutor showed no justification for the delay.