Date: 03-01-2016

Case Style: In re Reginald D. Reece

Case Number: 06-16-00022-CR

Judge: Josh R. Morriss, III, Bailey C. Moseley, Ralph K. Burgess

Court: In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

Plaintiff's Attorney: Reginald D. Reece

Defendant's Attorney: Unavailable

Description: Realtor, Reginald D. Reece, proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus
against the Honorable Leon Pesek, Jr., presiding judge of the 202nd Judicial District Court of
Bowie County, Texas. Reece seeks time credit, as he states it, “for the time spent (16 mos) in the
Constructive Custody of Another on A different charge with A Bowie County hold placed on him
8/21/11 while in the Constructive Custody of CASS County, pending disposition of charges (ie,
Traffic Tickets, theft charges).” Because we do not have jurisdiction over post-conviction writ
matters in felony cases, we dismiss Reece’s petition for lack of jurisdiction.
Reece’s petition for writ of mandamus asserts that he was arrested in this case June 7, 2011.
While on bail, Reece was stopped while driving in Atlanta, Texas, on August 21, 2011, and was
arrested on an outstanding warrant for unpaid traffic tickets. Reece argues that he is entitled to
credit for time served on charges brought by Cass County because “a hold was placed on him for
Bowie County, pending disposition of the Cass County charge.” He filed an application for writ
of habeas corpus on this basis, which the trial court forwarded to the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals with an order recommending its denial. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, §
3(b) (West 2015). The August 25, 2015, order recommending denial of Reece’s requested habeas
relief contained the trial court’s finding that Reece was released from confinement on December
21, 2012. In addressing this finding, Reece contends, again, as he states it, that he was not released
and, alternatively, that “due to no fault of his own- on 12/21/12 Relator was erroneously ‘Release
to the Streets’. . . and arrested on the streets in Bowie County, TX in this cause on 1/2/13 And is
therefore, entitled to this street time from 12/21/12 to 1/2/13.” Reece’s petition suggests methods
by which we can confirm his dates of confinement.
With respect to this request for mandamus relief, Reece must show that he has no adequate
remedy at law to redress his alleged harm and that what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act not
involving a discretionary or judicial decision. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of
Appeals at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). Further,
it is his burden to properly request and show his entitlement to mandamus relief. Barnes v. State,
832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (“Even a pro se
applicant for a writ of mandamus must show himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he seeks.”).
Reece cannot demonstrate his entitlement to mandamus relief. Reece argues that he is
entitled to time credit, a matter that is (and was) properly brought by an application for writ of
habeas corpus. Essentially, Reece’s petition for writ of mandamus seeks to appeal the trial court’s
order recommending denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus.

Outcome: Thus, this Court lacks authority to grant the relief that Reece seeks.
We dismiss Reece’s petition for a writ of mandamus relief for lack of jurisdiction.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: