Reginald Reece v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 13, 2026
Docket06-24-00031-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Reginald Reece v. the State of Texas (Reginald Reece v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reginald Reece v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-24-00031-CR

REGINALD REECE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 5th District Court Bowie County, Texas Trial Court No. 20F0292-005

Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef MEMORANDUM OPINION

Reginald Reece pled guilty to theft of property valued at less than $2,500.00.1 He was

sentenced to thirteen years’ confinement in prison. The trial court ordered Reece’s sentence to

run consecutively with two other theft convictions in which he was also sentenced to thirteen

years in prison.2 Via a consolidated brief, Reece appeals, arguing that (1) the trial court abused

its discretion when it ordered his sentences to run consecutively, rather than concurrently, and

(2) the trial court did not give him the correct amount of jail-time credit. In addition to its

response to Reece’s points of error, the State also presented a cross-point of error, maintaining,

among other things, that Reece did not have a right of appeal because the “records did, and could

not, contain certificates of . . . appeal” since, according to the State, Reece entered pleas of guilty

in each case.3

We addressed Reece’s arguments and the State’s cross-point of error in detail in our

opinion in appellate court cause number 06-24-00029-CR, and we apply the same legal standard

and analysis here as we did in that case.

We modify the trial court’s judgment in trial court cause number 20F0292-005 by

deleting the word “CONSECUTIVELY” from the “THIS SENTENCE SHALL RUN:” section

and modifying that section to state, “THIS SENTENCE SHALL RUN: AFTER REECE HAS

1 In this case, Reece appeals his conviction in trial court cause number 20F0292-005. 2 In our appellate court cause number 06-24-00029-CR, Reece appeals his theft conviction in trial court cause number 21F0725-005. Likewise, in our appellate court cause number 06-24-00030-CR, Reece appeals his theft conviction in trial court cause number 20F0970-005. 3 For the reasons stated in our opinion in appellate court cause number 06-24-00029-CR, we overrule the State’s cross-point of error. 2 SERVED HIS THIRTEEN-YEAR SENTENCE IN TRIAL COURT CAUSE NUMBER

21F0725-005; THIS SENTENCE SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY WITH REECE’S

SENTENCE IN TRIAL COURT CAUSE NUMBER 20F0970-005.”

We affirm the trial court’s judgment, as modified.

Charles van Cleef Justice

Date Submitted: July 9, 2025 Date Decided: February 13, 2026

Do Not Publish

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Reginald Reece v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reginald-reece-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2026.