UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 97-4656 ROGER LEE MCKENZIE, a/k/a Roger Lee Picklesimer, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Joseph Robert Goodwin, District Judge. (CR-96-166) Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 15, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL George A. Mills, III, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellant. Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Ray M. Shepard, Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: Roger Lee McKenzie pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, marijuana, and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994). He appeals the 286-month career offender sentence he r eceived, seeUSSG § 4B1.1,* contending that his guilty plea was involuntary, that the district court should have departed downward under USSG § 4A1.3, p.s., b ecause his prior state drug convictions involved small amounts of marijuana, and that he received ineffective assistance of c ounsel during his guilty plea and sentencing. We affirm in part and dismiss in part.McKenzie alleges that his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary because his attorney misled him a bout the length of the sentence he would receive. However, McKenzie was informed by the district court at the guilty plea hearing that his plea exposed him to a possible life sentence. The district court was not required to determine and inform him what the applicable guideline range would be before accepting his guilty plea. See United States v. DeFusco , 949 F.2d 114, 119 (4th Cir. 1991). Therefore, the plea was knowing and voluntary. We lack jurisdiction to review the district court's decision not to depart under USSG § 4A1.3. See United States v. Bayerle , 898 F.2d 28, 31 (4th Cir. 1990). Finally, a claim of ineffective assistance ofcounsel is not properly raised on direct appeal unless the record conclusively discloses that defense counsel's performance was constitutionally deficient. See United States v. Smith , 62 F.3d 641, 651 (4th Cir. 1995). As this is not such as case, McKenzie should raise any claim of ineffective assistance in a motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). Accordingly, we affirm the sentence imposed. We dismiss that por-

_________________________________________________________________ *U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (1995).
2tion of the appeal which challenges the district court's failure to depart. 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 IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART 3