
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bismark Virgilio TORRES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-4765.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 24, 2003.
    Decided July 8, 2003.
    Randy V. Cargill, Magee, Forster, Gold-stein & Sayers, P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, Donald R. Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Bismark Virgilio-Torres was convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine, cocaine base, marijuana, and methamphetamine. On appeal, Torres asserts that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move to withdraw the guilty plea and undermining Torres’ claim at sentencing that the plea was not voluntary. We affirm.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel generally are not cognizable on direct appeal. United States v. King, 119 F.3d 290, 295 (4th Cir.1997). An exception exists when the record conclusively shows ineffectiveness. Id. Here, Torres stated at his Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 hearing that he was satisfied with counsel, understood the charges and penalties that he faced, and understood the rights he was waiving by pleading guilty. Further, Torres informed the court that he was under no pressure or threats to plead guilty and that he had no complaints about the conduct of government agents and attorneys. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that the record conclusively demonstrates that counsel was ineffective for failing to move to withdraw the plea.

Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before us and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.  