Trevil v. State
Trevil v. State
992 So. 2d 346; 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 15112; 2008 WL 4414214
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Trevil v. State
Opinion of the Court
Because we find that appellant did not apprise the trial court of the potential discovery violation in a timely manner, we affirm. See Cuciak v. State, 410 So.2d 916, 918 (Fla. 1982) (“The probationer has the burden of bringing the violation to the court’s attention in a timely manner.”).
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.