With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Defendant’s Motion for Correction and Reduction of Sentence and Relief from Judgment. On November 30, 1992, we consolidated both appeals. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW Whether probation should be granted, revoked, or modified lies solely within the discretion of the sentencing court.... While the power of the court to revoke or to modify the conditions of probation is well established, the exercise of this authority must rest upon the sound and enlightened judgement of the trial court. And where the record reflects justifiable cause for the revocation or the modification of probation terms, the trial court’s determination will be sustained. State v. Huggett, 55 Haw. 632, 635-36, 525 P.2d 1119, 1122 (1974) (citation and footnotes omitted). Cf. State v. Lee, 10 Haw.App. 192, 862 P.2d 295 (1993) (<HOLDING>). III. DISCUSSION The dispositive issue is

A: recognizing that huggett was superseded by statute but on other grounds
B: holding that the statement of specific grounds in a motion for a new trial waives all other grounds not specified
C: recognizing that finley had been superseded by 28 usc  1367a
D: holding that where specific grounds for an objection are stated at trial all other grounds are waived and will not be considered for the first time on appeal
A.