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.