Alejandro Morales appeals the 87-month sentence he received after pleading guilty to possession with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. He contends that his sentence, which was already below the statutory minimum, would have been even lower if his trial counsel had adequately explained to him *235 the necessity for complete truthfulness in his discussions with the Government.

A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel generally will not be considered for the first time on direct appeal because there has not been an opportunity to develop evidence on the claim. United States v. Lampazianie, 251 F.3d 519, 527 (5th Cir. 2001). The record here has not been sufficiently developed to permit consideration of Morales’s claim on direct appeal.

Accordingly, without prejudice to Morales’s right to file a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.