United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 02-3292
                                   ___________

United States of America,               *
                                        *
             Appellee,                  * Appeal from the United States
                                        * District Court for the
      v.                                * Western District of Missouri.
                                        *
Daniel F. Ward,                         *      [UNPUBLISHED]
                                        *
             Appellant.                 *
                                   ___________

                          Submitted: January 15, 2003
                              Filed: January 22, 2003
                                   ___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
                           ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Daniel Ward pleaded guilty to health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§§ 1347 and 2. After increasing Ward’s base offense level for abusing a position of
public or private trust, the district court1 imposed a sentence of 5 months
imprisonment and 5 months home detention, 3 years supervised release, and
restitution of $49,944.01. On appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief
under Anders v. California, 

(1967), arguing that the district court erred
in applying the abuse-of-trust increase.

      1
      The HONORABLE HOWARD F. SACHS, United States District Judge for
the Western District of Missouri.
       The district court did not err. Ward occupied a position of trust--which he
abused--with respect to Medicare, because he was able to defraud Medicare by
certifying that in his professional judgment treatment was medically necessary and
had been provided. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3, comment. (n.1); United States v. Hodge,

, 556-57 (6th Cir. 2001); United States v. Hoogenboom, 

,
671 (7th Cir. 2000); United States v. Rutgard, 

, 1293 (9th Cir. 1997).
Further, having reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 

, 80 (1988),
we find no nonfrivolous issue.

      Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

      A true copy.

            Attest:

                     CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                                        -2-