Appellant was found by a preponderance of the evidence to have violated his probation by committing a robbery and violating
1.
Appellant was acquitted in the criminal trial on the robbery charge. The parties stipulated that the record of the criminal trial would constitute the record for the probation revocation proceedings on the charge of robbery. The same trial judge who conducted the criminal trial adjudicated the violation of probation. See Russ v. State, 313 So.2d 758 (Fla.) (approving revocation of probation on facts not sufficient to convince jury to convict), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 924, 96 S.Ct. 267, 46 L.Ed.2d 250 (1975); Bernhardt v. State, 288 So.2d 490, 500-01 (Fla.1974) (same).
2.
The court noted, "Defendant has previously violated his probation and continues to do so.”