
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector VARGAS, a/k/a Rudolpho Pineda-Rodriquez, a/k/a Jesus Calderon, a/k/a Jesus, a/k/a Hector Calderon-Vargas, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-4925.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 6, 2002.
    Decided July 15, 2002.
    R. Clarke Speaks, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, J. Frank Bradsher, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Hector Vargas appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(B) (West 1999) and 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994). Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

Vargas raises only one issue on appeal, contending that the district court abused its discretion by refusing to accept his guilty plea. Under Rule 11(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, “the court should not enter a judgment upon [a guilty] plea without making such inquiry as shall satisfy it that there is a factual basis for the plea.” Furthermore, there is “no absolute right to have a guilty plea accepted,” and a district court may “reject a plea in [the] exercise of sound judicial discretion.” Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 262, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971). We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and record on appeal and are satisfied that the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting Vargas’s guilty plea.

Accordingly, we affirm Vargas’s conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.  