UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
In Re:
COURT OPERATIONS UNDER THE
EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES GENERAL ORDER NO. 22-06
CREATED BY COVID-19 WITH RESPECT
TO VIDEO TELECONFERENCING FOR
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
This Court issues this General Order, as one in a series of General Orders, in response to
the ongoing spread of the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) in the Southern District of Ohio and
elsewhere. There have been approximately seventy-four million confirmed cases of COVID-19
throughout the United States, more than two million five hundred seventy-six thousand total cases
across Ohio, and of that total, over one million three hundred nineteen thousand, five hundred
sixty-nine in the Southern District of Ohio, with seats of Court in Columbus, Cincinnati, and
Dayton. On March 13, 2020, the President declared a National Emergency relating to COVID-19,
which remains in place as of the date of this Order.
Due to COVID-19 and its impact on institutions, including the judiciary and its
administration of justice, Congress has passed legislation authorizing the use of video and
telephone conferencing, under certain circumstances and with the consent of the defendant, for
various criminal case events during the course of the COVID-19 emergency. See The CARES
Act, H.R. 748 Section 15002 et seq. The Judicial Conference of the United States has also found
that emergency conditions due to the national emerg~ncy declared by the President have affected
and will materially affect the functioning of the federal courts generally.
On March 30, 2020, I, as Chief Judge of this District, issued General Order 20-07, •
authorizing the use of video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was
not reasonably available, for all criminal proceedings listed in Section 15002(b) of the CARES
Act. In addition, pursuant to Section 15002(b)(2), I found that felony pleas under Rule 11 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and felony sentencings under Rule 32 of the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure could not be conducted in person in this District without seriously
jeopardizing public health and safety. General Order 20-07 was set to expire on June 30, 2020.
On May 29, 2020, I issued General Order 20-18, which extended the operative effect of
the authorizations in General Order 20-07. More specifically, General Order 20-18 authorized the
use of video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was not reasonably
available, for all criminal proceedings listed in Section 15002(b) of the CARES Act, and did so
for a period of ninety days after the issuance of that General Order. General Order 20-18 was set
to expire on August 27, 2020.
On August 20, 2020, I issued General Order 20-26, which extended the operative effects
of the authorizations in General Orders 20-07 and 20-18. General Order 20-26 authorized the use
of video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was not reasonably
available, for all criminal proceedings listed in Section l 5002(b) of the CARES Act, and did so
for a period of ninety days after the issuance of that General Order. General Order 20-26 was set
to expire on November 18, 2020.
On November 17, 2020, I issued General Order20-35, which extended the operative effects
of General Orders 20-07, 20-18, and 20-26. General Order 20-35 authorized the use of video
conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was not reasonably available, for
all criminal proceedings listed in Section 15002(b) of the CARES Act, and did so for a period of
ninety days after the issuance of that General Order. General Order 20-35 was set to expire on
February 15, 2021.
2
On February 11, 2021, I issued General Order 21-05 which extended the operative effects
of General Orders 20-07, 20-18, 20-26, and 20-35. General Order 21-05 authorized the use of
video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was not reasonably available,
for all criminal proceedings listed in Section 15002(b) of the CARES Act, and did so for a period
of ninety days after the issuance of that General Order. General Order 21-05 was set to expire on
May 12, 2021.
On May 11, 2021, I issued General Order 21 -12 which extended the operative effects of
General Orders 20-07, 20-18, 20-26, 20-35, and 21-05. General Order 21-12 authorized the use
of video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was not reasonably
available, for all criminal proceedings listed in Section 15002(b) of the CARES Act, and did so
for a period of ninety days after the issuance of that General Order. General Order 21-12 expired
on August 9, 2021.
On August 6, 2021, I issued General Order 21-19, which extended the operative effects of
General Orders 20-07, 20-18, 20-26, 20-35, 21-05, and 21-12. General Order 21-19 authorized
the use of video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was not reasonably
available, for all criminal proceedings listed in Section 15002(b) of the CARES Act, and did so
for a period of ninety days after the issuance of that General Order. General Order 21-19 expired
on November 4, 2021.
On November 2, 2021, I issued General Order 21-23, which extended the operative effects
of General Orders 20-07, 20-18, 20-26, 20-35, 21-05, 21-12, and 21-19. General Order 21-23
authorized the use of video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing was not
reasonably available, for all criminal proceedings listed in Section 15002(b) of the CARES Act,
3
and did so for a period of ninety days after the issuance of that General Order. General Order 21-
23 is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2022.
The end of the period specified in General Order 21-23 is now approaching. Section
15002(b)(3)(B) of the CARES Act thus requires me to determine whether an additional extension
of the previous authorizations that I issued under that Act is warranted. Based on my review of
the current situation, I find that the continuing spread of COVID-19 throughout this District, the
emergence of several new more virulent variants of the COVID-19 virus, most notably the
Omicron variant, and the ongoing harm that the disease is causing to persons residing in this
District, constitutes an ongoing emergency condition that warrants an extension of the
authorizations set forth in General Order 21-23 (which itself was an extension of the authorizations
in General Orders 20-07, 20-18, 20-26, 20-35, 21-05, 21-12, and 21-19.). Accordingly, I now find
as follows:
As Chief Judge, and pursuant to Section l 5002(b)(1) of the CARES Act, I hereby authorize
the use of video conferencing, or telephone conferencing if video conferencing is not reasonably
available, for all events listed in Section l 5002(b) of the legislation to wit:
a) Detention hearings under Section 3142 oftitle 18, United States Code.
b) Initial appearances under Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
c) Preliminary hearings under Rule 5 .1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
d) Waivers of indictment under Rule 7(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
e) Arraignments under Rule 10 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
f) Probation and supervised release revocation proceedings under Rule 32.1 of the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure.
g) Pretrial release revocation proceedings under Section 3148 of title 18, United States
Code.
4
h) Appearances under Rule 40 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
i) Misdemeanor pleas and sentencings as described in Rule 43(b)(2) of the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure.
j) Proceedings under Rule 403 of title 18, United States Code (commonly known as the
"Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act"), except for contested transfer hearings and
juvenile delinquency adjudication or trial proceedings.
Additionally, pursuant to Section 15002(b)(2), I, as Chief Judge, on my own motion,
further specifically find that felony pleas under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
and felony sentencings under Rule 32 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure cannot be
conducted in person in this District without seriously jeopardizing public health and safety. As a
result, if any judge in an individual case finds, for specific reasons, that a felony plea or sentencing
in that case cannot be further delayed without serious harm to the interests of justice, the judge
may, with the consent of the defendant after consultation with counsel, use video conferencing, or
teleconferencing if video conferencing is not reasonably available, for the felony plea or
sentencing in that case. Judges may also use this authority for equivalent events in juvenile cases
as described in Section 15002(b)(2)(B), with the consent of the juvenile after consultation with
counsel.
Pursuant to Section 15002(b)(3) of the CARES Act, this Order, which is effective
immediately, will remain in effect for 90 days unless terminated earlier. If emergency conditions
continue to exist 90 days from the date of this Order, or if the President's emergency declaration
remains in effect, along with the Judicial Conference's finding that the emergency conditions will
materially affect the functioning of the federal courts, the Chief Judge will review this Order and
determine whether to extend it. Such review will occur not less frequently than once every 90
5
days, until the last day of the covered emergency period or until the Chief Judge determines that
this authorization is no longer warranted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 31, 2022
ALGENON L. MARBLEY
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
