We find no abuse of the trial court’s discretion in dismissing the information with prejudice because, as it found, the state’s inexcusably tardy and inadequate compliance with an order requiring a bill of particulars had adversely affected the defendant’s ability to prepare for trial. See and compare, Leeman v. State, 357 So.2d 703 (Fla. 1978) (trial court found no prejudice in non-compliance with order).

Affirmed.