In what circumstances will a motion to dismiss an allegation of forgery be dismissed?

We recognize that in People v. Prantil (1985) 169 Cal.App.3d 592, 604, the court concluded that a delay in filing an indictment for forgery against an attorney was justified because the investigating officers "correctly decided" not to investigate the case earlier to avoid the risk of interfering with the attorney's relationship with a client in an unrelated matter. The attorney there was charged with forgery by uttering or using a forged check, which the evidence suggested had been stolen by the attorney's client. (Id. at pp. 596, 598.) The facts herewhere defense counsel was suspected of impropriety in relation to the very matter before the courtare distinguishable. We see no abuse of the trial court's discretion in denying the motion to dismiss.