AMARILLO, Texas (KAMR/KCIT) — In a motion made by his defense filed Monday, Bart Reagor is requesting that his counsel be allowed to interview the jurors who participated in the trial.

According to previous reports by, Reagor’s week-long jury trial ended Oct. 15 with a 12-person jury convicting Reagor of one count of making false statements to a bank while finding him not guilty for two counts of bank fraud.

Officials with Amarillo Federal Court announced Oct. 19 that Reagor is scheduled to be sentenced at 1:30 p.m. Feb. 24, 2022, and faces up to 30 years in federal prison, according to the United States Department of Justice.

The rule, according to court documents, states that appellate courts uphold the litigants’ rights to interview jurors about whether “extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury’s attention (and/or) an outside influence was improperly brought to bear on any juror…”

“Mr. Reagor’s case raises a serious question as to whether an outside influence was improperly brought to bear on this jury,” the documents read.

According to previous reports by, the jury brought a series of notes to the judge, stating that on numerous occasions, they were “deadlocked.” During the second day of deliberation, U.S. District Judge Matthew  J. Kacsmaryk, the federal judge overseeing Reagor’s trial, invoked an Allen Charge, urging the jury at the time, to continue deliberations for this “important” case.

As read by Kacsmaryk during the trial, the charge stated there is no more or any clearer evidence which could be given to the jury in this case and that they had a “duty to agree on a verdict.” Two hours after this charge was read, the jury reached its verdict in the case.

“Notably, the verdicts are factually irreconcilable, the jury determining that while the Defendant (Reagor) was guilty of submitting a false statement to a financial institution, he was not guilty of bank fraud,” the documents read. “Clearly, had Reagor been actually guilty of submitting a false statement to a financial institution, the bank fraud convictions would have logically followed.”

Officials with the defense state that the course of how the jury came to its verdict “strongly suggest the possibility of extraneous prejudicial information brought to the jury’s attention, or an outside influence improperly brought to bear on these jurors.” Because of this, Reagor’s defense is requesting to interview the jurors.

As of Tuesday afternoon, there has been no response to the defense’s motion.

This story is developing. Check with for updates