¶1Joseph Redman appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. Appellant’s motion was facially insufficient because it presented issues which were raised and disposed of on direct appeal. Such issues are not proper grounds for a post-conviction motion. Foster v. State, 400 So.2d 1, 4 (Fla.1981). The trial court acted correctly in denying appellant’s motion without an evidentiary hearing. Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.850.
¶2Affirmed.
¶3specially concurring:
¶4I agree that the appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief which merely alleged in a conclusory fashion that the state “lost, destroyed or otherwise suppressed” evidence favorable to the appellant was facially insufficient to require the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing.