Affirmed. See Taylor v. State, 855 So.2d 1 (Fla. 2003), cert. denied, — U.S. ——, 124 S.Ct. 1605, 158 L.Ed.2d 248 (2004); State v. Taplis, 684 So.2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), review dismissed, 703 So.2d 453 (Fla. 1997), both standing for the proposition that a party attempting to exclude otherwise relevant evidence on the basis of a gap in the chain of custody must show a likelihood or probability of tampering.