USA v. Orange

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	Case No. CR-24-252-R
)
PRISCILLA ORANGE, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
ORDER
Before the Court is Priscilla Orange’s Amended Unopposed Fifth Motion to
Continue Jury Trial [Doc. No. 39]. Defendant was arraigned on a Superseding
Indictment on April 21, 2025 [Doc. No. 33]. Defendant will file a written waiver of
rights under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The United States does not oppose
the Motion.
The Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, provides that a person accused of a
crime is generally entitled to a trial within 70 days of the filing of the charge or the
accused’s appearance on that charge. Id. § 3161(c)(1). When a requested continuance
would cause a violation of the statutory time limit, a court may grant the continuance
only if it finds that the period of delay is excludable under a specific provision of the
Act. Id. § 3161(h). When, as here, a continuance is sought on the basis of the “ends of
justice” under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7), the Court must decide whether the purpose
served by granting the requested continuance outweighs the best interests of the public
and the defendant to a speedy trial.
Case 5:24-cr-00252-R Document 40 Filed 06/23/25 Page 1 of 2

2
Based on the undisputed information presented by Defendant, 	the Court
determines that the ends of justice are served by granting a continuance of the existing
trial deadline to allow for a response and ruling on two motions to dismiss filed by Mrs.
Orange, her counsel to continue to acquire discovery and continue his investigation and
to properly prepare the case, and the parties to continue to narrow the issues to be tried,
and Mrs. Orange’s Counsel’s current July court schedule to outweigh the best interests
of the public and Defendant to an earlier trial setting. The Court further determines that
the period of delay caused by the granting of the motion is excludable for purposes of
the Speedy Trial Act, under 18 U.S.C § 3161(h)(7), on the basis that the failure to grant
a 	continuance 	would 	deny 	counsel 	the 	time 	reasonably 	necessary 	for 	effective
preparation, taking in to account the exercise of due diligence.
Accordingly, Defendant’s Unopposed Second Motion to Continue Jury Trial
[Doc. No. 39] is GRANTED. The matter is continued to the September 9, 2025, trial
docket. 	All documents shall be filed in accordance with the deadlines in the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure and this Court’s Local Criminal Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 23rd day of June, 2025.
Case 5:24-cr-00252-R Document 40 Filed 06/23/25 Page 2 of 2