In Langston v. State, 800 S.W.2d 553, 555 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) the prosecutor's office filed a motion to revoke probation based upon an arrest for driving while intoxicated. The defendant contacted the authorities about the motion and was advised of the probation violation and that a warrant was outstanding. The defendant said he would contact his attorney. Although the authorities were aware of the defendant's address, they took no action to apprehend him until he appeared in court for the driving while intoxicated case. The State contended that the due diligence defense did not apply because of a "lack of cooperation by Appellant to see to this matter when notified of the pending Motion to Revoke Probation."