Juan Enrique Moreno appeals from his jury verdict conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana. His sole argument on appeal is that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to advise him to plead guilty and by failing to secure a plea bargain agreement with the Government. He seeks vacatur of his conviction and a new trial. Alternatively, he requests a remand so that an evidentiary hearing can be conducted as to his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.

As a general rule, this court will not consider an ineffective-assistanee-of-counsel claim that was not raised in district court. United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir. 1987). Moreover, the Supreme Court has emphasized that a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion is the preferred method for raising a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 503-04, 123 S.Ct. 1690, 155 L.Ed.2d 714 (2003). As the record for this case is not sufficiently developed to qualify for an exception to that general rule, we decline to consider Moreno’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim in this appeal without prejudice to his ability to raise this claim in a § 2255 motion. Also, in light of the Supreme Court’s stated preference for resolution of such claims via a § 2255 motion, we deny Moreno’s alternative request for a remand.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.