
    Rayford MARTIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 76-2146.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Aug. 9, 1977.
    Nelson E. Bailey of Bailey & Brown, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Paul H. Zacks, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   LETTS, Judge.

We are compelled to reverse the trial judge’s order denying the defendant’s Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 motion, without a hearing, upon the authority of Barfield v. State, 348 So.2d 621, Opinion filed July 8, 1977 (Fla. 4th DCA). It would appear that Bar-field mandates an evidentiary hearing “. . . unless the motion or record conclusively shows that the movant is entitled to no relief.”

Reversed and remanded for an evidentia-ry hearing on the appellant’s motion.

DAUKSCH, J., concurs.

DOWNEY, J., dissents, with opinion.

DOWNEY,

Judge, dissenting:

My study of the record in this case compels me to dissent for the reason that the allegations of fact contained in appellant’s motion for post conviction relief do not rise to the level requiring an evidentiary hearing.

Accordingly, I would affirm the order appealed from.  