most severe of all sanctions which should be employed only in extreme circumstances”) (quoting Ham v. Dunmire, 891 So.2d 492, 495 (Fla.2004)); Empire World Towers, LLC v. CDR Creances, S.A.S., 89 So.3d 1034, 1038 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). “The court should consider the proper mix of factors and carefully balance a policy favoring adjudication on the merits -with competing policies to maintain the integrity of the judicial system.” Id. Of significance, the court’s .finding of fraud “must be supported by clear and convincing evidence that goes to ‘the very core issue at trial.’ ” Id. at 624. Upon our -review of the record in this case, there is an absence of competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s determination, by clear and convincing evidence, that Martinez “li A 2014) (<HOLDING>); Miller v. Nelms, 966 So.2d 437 (Fla. 2d DCA
holding that the right to testify on ones own behalf does not include the right to lie holding right to be fundamental recognizing defendants right to due process includes the right to present a defense by crossexamining witnesses holding that defendants exercise of right to testify in own behalf waives his fifth amendment privilege against selfincrimination holding court denied party a fundamental right to due process by failing to allow him to present witnesses or testify on his own behalf