Jacob Schwem-Casey v. The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law No 7 of Bexar County

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-08-00031-CR Jacob SCHWEM-CASEY, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the County Court at Law No. 7, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 217032 Honorable Monica Guerrero, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Rebecca Simmons, Justice Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Delivered and Filed: December 3, 2008 AFFIRMED After entering a plea of not guilty, on October 3, 2007, Appellant Jacob Schwem-Casey was found guilty by a jury for the offense of family violence-bodily injury. The trial court subsequently sentenced Schwem-Casey to one year confinement in the Bexar County Jail, suspended and probated for a term of two years and assessed a fine in the amount of $4,000.00, of which $3,500.00 was probated. 04-08-00031-CR Schwem-Casey s court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel concludes that the appeal has no merit. Counsel provided Schwem-Casey with a copy of the brief and informed him of his right to review the record and file his own brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Schwem-Casey did not file a pro se brief. After reviewing the record and counsel s brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (noting court of appeals should not address merits of issues raised in Anders brief or pro se response but should only determine if the appeal is frivolous). The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Appellate counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1. Rebecca Simmons, Justice Do Not Publish -2- 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.