LINGO v. STATE (2025)

Affirmed. See Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32, 35 (Fla. 1985) (“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”); Burton v. State, 237 So. 3d 1138, 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“Despite the fact that all relevant evidence is admissible, section 90.403 provides for the exclusion of relevant evidence if ‘its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.’ ” (quoting Taylor v. State, 855 So. 2d 1, 21–22 (Fla. 2003))); Perry v. State, 395 So. 2d 170, 174 (Fla. 1980) (“Disclosure requirements for the prosecution principally concern those matters not accessible to the defense in the course of reasonably diligent preparation.”).

PER CURIAM.