CARLEY, Judge.
A petition for revocation of appellant's probation was filed, charging him with the commission of armed robbery, burglary and simple battery. A hearing was held and appellant's probation was revoked. He appeals.
The quantum of evidence sufficient to authorize the revocation of probation is "slight evidence." Mingo v. State, 155 Ga. App. 284, 286 (2) ( 270 S.E.2d 700) (1980). On appeal, appellant urges that the photographic identification procedure by which the victim identified him as the perpetrator of the crimes was "unnecessarily suggestive" and that the victim's subsequent in-court identification was "tainted" thereby. Appellant did not object at the hearing to the victim's in-court identification testimony as "tainted" or otherwise raise the issue of "suggestive" identification procedures. See Dodson v. State, 237 Ga. 607, 608 (3) ( 229 S.E.2d 364) (1976). Moreover, the transcript reveals that considering the "totality of the circumstances" the testimony of the victim was properly admitted. See Eiland v. State, 246 Ga. 112 ( 268 S.E.2d 922) (1980). The evidence supports the trial court's revocation of appellant's probation. See Johnson v. State, 142 Ga. App. 124 ( 235 S.E.2d 550) (1977).
Judgment affirmed. Deen, P. J., and Banke, J., concur.
DECIDED APRIL 8, 1981.