If such petitions render the trial courts' subsequent orders of revocation void, as argued by Leverette, then all such previous revocations — without time limitation — are subject to attack, since "[t]he judgment of a court having no jurisdiction of the person or the subject matter or which is void for any other cause is a mere nullity and may be so held in any court when it becomes material to the interest of the parties to consider it." See, e.g., Roberts v. Lowry, 160 Ga. 494, 495 (128 S.E. 746) (1925); Smith v. State, 164 Ga. App. 384, 385 (2) ( 297 S.E.2d 738) (1982); Kitchens v. State, 234 Ga. App. 785 ( 508 S.E.2d 176) (1998). OCGA § 9-12-16.

We are satisfied that the evidence before the trial court was sufficient to establish the defendant's failure to abide by the requirements of his probation. See generally Smith v. State, 164 Ga. App. 384 ( 297 S.E.2d 738) (1982). Judgment affirmed. Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

The time for raising it would be within the time for filing an answer, as his privilege is waived if not invoked at the "first opportunity." Cochran v. Carlin, 165 Ga. App. 141, 144 ( 297 S.E.2d 738) (1982); see Axson v. Nat. Surety Corp., 254 Ga. 248 ( 327 S.E.2d 732) (1985) (party must raise Fifth Amendment privilege as to each question asked). As the trial court pointed out, "[h]ad he [raised his Fifth Amendment issues prior to filing his purported answer], the Court would have had the opportunity to conduct an in camera review or other proceedings to determine the validity of his Fifth Amendment claim."