Dismissal of the information for prosecutorial misconduct is not a remedy without a showing or finding, supported by substantial evidence, that defendant has been prevented from receiving a fair trial. The appellate court reversed the first judgment of guilt by jury trial because of non disclosure of a videotape of a medical examination of the victim by the Sexual Assault Response Team. On retrial, the trial court found that the prosecutor engaged in substantial misconduct and dismissed the case. Specifically, the prosecutor solicited untruthful declarations from his adversary and the judge to benefit a State Bar investigation; made misleading statements; and provided false testimony in the hearing on defendant’s motions. The appellate court, while agreeing that the prosecutor’s conduct was of concern, reversed, finding that there was no showing or finding that the misconduct prevented defendant from receiving a fair trial, which is required in misconduct of this kind. The court also had no authority to dismiss under its exercise of supervisory powers over criminal proceedings.