Can a motion to dismiss be dismissed on the basis of ineffective assistance?

To the extent defendant claims that counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to move for dismissal of the action based on the trial delay caused by the continuances, we are not persuaded. " ' "[If] the record on appeal sheds no light on why counsel acted or failed to act in the manner challenged [,] . . . unless counsel was asked for an explanation and failed to provide one, or unless there simply could be no satisfactory explanation," the claim on appeal must be rejected.' [Citations.] A claim of ineffective assistance in such a case is more appropriately decided in a habeas corpus proceeding. [Citations.]" (People v. Mendoza Tello (1997) 15 Cal.4th 264, 266-267.) In this case, trial counsel was not asked for any explanation as to why he had failed to file a motion to dismiss and there is none provided to us. There could easily be a satisfactory explanation, such as counsel's determination that the continuances were justified by good cause and a motion to dismiss would be unwarranted, and would only result in further

Page 9