UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FILED
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA FEB 2 3 202Z
CARMELltA mom SHpllWrtLERK
IN RE: USE OF VIDEO AND TELEPHONE ) U.S. DtST.
CONFERENCING FOR CRIMINAL ) G.O. 22-1
PROCEEDINGS DURING THE COVID-19 ) (Extending G.O. 20-9.1)
PANDEMIC )
ORDER
On March 27, 2020, the President signed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security Act (CARES Act) into law. The CARES Act provides that "if the
Judicial Conference of the United States finds that emergency conditions due to the
national emergency declared by the President under the National Emergencies Act (50
U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) with respect to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) will
materially affect the functioning of. . . the Federal courts generally ... the chiefjudge of
a district court covered by the finding ... may authorize the use of video teleconferencing,
or telephone conferencing if video teleconferencing is not available." H.R. 748 at
§ 15002(b)(1). On March 29, 2020, the Judicial Conference of the United States
specifically found that emergency conditions due to COVID-19 "have materially affected
and will materially affect the functioning of the federal courts generally." Memorandum
from Director James C. Duffto All United States Judges at 1 (Mar 29, 2020).
On March 31, 2020, I authorized the use of video teleconferencing, or telephone
conferencing if video teleconferencing is not reasonably available, for the events
authorized by § 15002(b)(1). In Re: Use of Video and Telephone Conferencing for
Criminal Proceedings During the COVID-19 Pandemic, G.O. 20-9.1 at 1-2 (Mar. 31,
2020). In addition, pursuant to § 15002(b)(2), I found that, under the circumstances then
existing,felony pleas under Fed. R. Crim.P. 11 and felony sentencings under Fed.R.Crim.
P. 32 could not in every instance be conducted in person without seriously jeopardizing
public health and safety. Thereafter,the authorizations contained in G.0.20-9.1 have been
extended for an additional 90 days. In Re: Use of Video and Telephone Conferencingfor
Criminal Proceedings During the COVID-19 Pandemic, G.0.20-9.2 at 2(June 29,2020);
G.O. 20-9.3 at 2(Sept. 17, 2020); G.0. 20-9.4 at 3(Dec. 14, 2020); G.0. 21-5 at 3(Mar.
11, 2021); G.O. 21-5.1 at 3 (June 9, 2021); G.O. 21-5.2 at 2(Sept. 7, 2021); G.O. 21-5.3
at 2(Dec. 2,2021).
Section 15002(b)(3)(A) ofthe CARES Act, G.O. 20-9.1, G.O. 20-9.2, G.O. 20-9.3,
G.O. 20-9.4, G.O. 21-5, G.O. 21-5.1, G.O. 21-5.2, and G.O. 21-5.3 provide that if
emergency conditions continue to exist 90 days after issuance ofthe original or subsequent
Order, the Chief Judge must review the findings contained in the Order and determine
whether to extend the authorizations contained therein. Pursuant to that requirement, I
have conducted that review and find that the circumstances existing today weigh in favor
of continuing the authorizations. Although 55 percent of Oklahomans have been fully
vaccinated, a new variant has been identified in the United States and community spread
of the virus remains extensive. Indeed, the seven-day average of daily new cases of
COVID-19 in the State of Oklahoma are 14 times higher than in March 2020 when video
teleconferencing was first authorized.
I therefore extend the authorizations contained in G.O. 20-9.1 for an additional 90
days. All other provisions of G.O. 20-9.1 shall remain in effect until further order of the
Court. If emergency conditions continue to exist 90 days from the date ofthis Order, the
findings contained in the Order will be reviewed and a detennination will be made whether
to further extend the authorizations.
o 1
IT IS SO ORDERED this 2 3 day ofFebruary, 2022.
TIMOTHY D.peGIUSTI
Chief United S^tates District Judge
