UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 98-4830 TAMARA LLAMAS, a/k/a Tamara Deyton, a/k/a Tamara Mullins, a/k/a Tamara Smith, a/k/a Tammy, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.

Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-97-63-H) Submitted: July 20, 1999 Decided: August 5, 1999 Before ERVIN, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. _________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Robert J. McAfee, MCCOTTER, MCAFEE & ASHTON, P.L.L.C., New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellant. Janice McKenzie Cole, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, J. Frank Bradsher, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). _________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: Tamara Llamas appeals from the district court's judgment entered pursuant to a plea agreement in which Llamas pled guilty to conspir- acy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 846 (West Supp. 1999); interstate travel with intent to commit murder for hire in violation of 18 U.S.C.A.

§ 1958(a) (West Supp. 1999) and 18 U.S.C.§ 2 (1994); using and car- rying a firearm causing death, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(j) (West Supp. 1999) and 18 U.S.C. § 2; tampering with a witness or informant by killing in violation of 18 U.S.C.A.§ 1512(a)(1)(C) (West Supp. 1999) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Llamas later moved to with- draw her guilty plea. The district court denied the motion. Llamas was sentenced to four terms of life imprisonment. The only issue in this appeal is the propriety of the court's denial of Llamas' motion to withdraw her guilty plea.

We review the denial of Llamas' motion for abuse of discretion.

See United States v. Craig, 985 F.2d 175, 178 (4th Cir. 1993). A defendant does not have an absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea, see United States v. Ewing, 957 F.2d 115, 119 (4th Cir. 1992), but must present a "fair and just" reason. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(e); United States v. Lambey, 974 F.2d 1389, 1394 (4th Cir. 1992). We find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Lla- mas' motion to withdraw her guilty plea. See United States v. Moore, 931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1991); United States v. Truglio, 493 F.2d 574, 578 (4th Cir. 1974). Accordingly, we affirm Llamas' convictions and sentences. 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