Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Janis KREITINGER, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-06-14
Citations: 101 F. App'x 179
Docket Number: No. 03-2988
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Janis KREITINGER, Appellant.
Judges: Before BYE, MCMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 101
Pages: 179–179

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Janis KREITINGER, Appellant.
No. 03-2988.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted June 4, 2004.
Decided June 14, 2004.
Sean R. Berry, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Cedar Rapids, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Janis Kreitinger, Pekin, IL, pro se.
Before BYE, MCMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Janis Kreitinger (Kreitinger) pled guilty to credit card and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2), 1343, and 3147(1). The district court sentenced Kreitinger to a total term of 46 months imprisonment to be followed by concurrent 3- and 5-year terms of supervised release. The court also ordered Kreitinger to pay restitution of $1,881.03. Kreitinger appeals. Her counsel has filed a brief and moved to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Kreitinger has filed a pro se supplemental brief.
After careful review, we reject counsel's argument that the court plainly erred in faffing to determine Kreitinger's understanding of applicable Guidelines enhancements. See United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 58-59, 122 S.Ct. 1043, 152 L.Ed.2d 90 (2002) (defendant who allows Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 error to pass without objection in trial court must satisfy plain-error rule, i.e., that claimed plain error affected defendant's substantial rights); United States v. Bond, 135 F.3d 1247, 1248 (8th Cir.) (per curiam) (at plea hearing, district court not obligated to inform defendant of applicable Guidelines range or actual sentence), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 961, 118 S.Ct. 2388, 141 L.Ed.2d 753 (1998). Kreitinger's claims of ineffective assistance are not properly before us. See United States v. Martin, 59 F.3d 767, 771 (8th Cir.1995).
Having found no nonfrivolous issues after reviewing the record as required under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we affirm. We also grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we deny Kreitinger's motion for new counsel.
. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.