1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Gregory J. Kuykendall, Bar # 012508

Amy P. Knight, Bar # 031374

KUYKENDALL & ASSOCIATES

531 S Convent Avenue

Tucson, AZ 85701

(520) 792-8033

greg@kuykendall-law.com

amyknight@kuykendall-law.com

Pro Bono Attorneys for Defendant Scott Daniel Warren

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCOTT DANIEL WARREN,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No.CR-18-00223-001-TUC-RCC(BPV)

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO 

EXCEED PAGE LIMITATIONS

Defendant, Scott Daniel Warren, Ph.D., by and through his attorneys undersigned, 

Gregory J. Kuykendall, and Amy P. Knight, hereby requests that the Court allow him to 

file a Motion to Dismiss Indictment Due to Selective Enforcement that exceeds the 17-

page limit in LRCiv 7.2(e) and LRCrim 12.1(a). Yesterday, Dr. Warren sought this Court’s 

leave to file a 35-page motion to dismiss. This afternoon, the Court granted the motion, 

then changed its mind and, seven minutes later, denied the motion without explanation.

Dr. Warren has made a good faith effort to shorten the motion; however, because 

selective enforcement claims depend in large part on the quantity of evidence a defendant 

offers, he is unable to make the motion significantly shorter without removing evidence 

essential his motion; to do so would risk having the motion denied due to insufficient 

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 178 Filed 03/15/19 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

evidence on one or both prongs of the selective enforcement claim. Defendant cannot 

reasonably carry the burden of establishing both elements of a fact-dependent claim to the 

high standards courts have required while simultaneously confining his pleading to the 17 

pages contemplated by the local rules of this court for all types of motions. Insistence on 

strict compliance with the local rules for such a motion would severely limit defendants’

ability to meet the standards courts have imposed. This is especially so because this Court 

has proven hesitant to grant evidentiary hearings on similar matters in a related case Dr. 

Warren is facing, No. 17-mj-341. 

This substitute proposed motion is now 31 pages long (or 30, excluding the caption, 

signature block, and certificate of service). Accordingly, Defendant respectfully requests 

that this Court permit the 31-page filing. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 15th day of March, 2019.

By /s/ Amy P. Knight

Gregory J. Kuykendall

Amy P. Knight

531 S Convent Avenue

Tucson, AZ 85701

Attorneys for Defendant Scott 

Daniel Warren

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on March 15th, 2019, I electronically transmitted a PDF version of 

this document to the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF System for filing and for 

transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: 

Nathaniel J. Walters, Esq. (email: Nathaniel.walters@usdoj.gov) 

Anna R. Wright, Esq. (email: anna.wright@usdoj.gov) 

United States Attorney’s Office 

405 W. Congress, Suite 4800 

Tucson, AZ 85701

Case 4:18-cr-00223-RCC-DTF Document 178 Filed 03/15/19 Page 2 of 2