
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John D. SMITH, a/k/a Ronald R. Wallace, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-4906.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 30, 2003.
    Decided June 19, 2003.
    Benjamin T. Stepp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Regan A. Pendleton, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WILLIAMS and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Following a guilty plea to one count of arson, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 844(i), 2 (2000), and one count of conspiracy to commit arson, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) & (n) (2000), John D. Smith was sentenced to concurrent sixty-month prison terms. Smith appeals, claiming that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the government’s refusal to move for a downward departure pursuant to the plea agreement. 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). Instead, to allow for adequate development of the record, a defendant generally must bring his ineffective assistance claims in a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). See id.; United States v. Hoyle, 33 F.3d 415, 418 (4th Cir.1994). An exception exists where the record conclusively shows ineffective assistance. King, 119 F.3d at 295. Because the record does not conclusively show that Smith was denied effective assistance of counsel, Smith’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim is not cognizable in this direct appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm Smith’s 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.  