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

KUYKENDALL & ASSOCIATES

531 S Convent Avenue

Tucson, AZ 85701

(520) 792-8033

greg@kuykendall-law.com

Amy P. Knight, Bar # 031374

KNIGHT LAW FIRM, LLC

3849 E Broadway Blvd #288

Tucson, AZ 85716

(520) 878-8849

amy@amyknightlaw.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. 17-mj-00341-RCC(JR)

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM IN 

SUPPORT OF SCOTT DANIEL 

WARREN

16 U.S.C. § 668dd(f)(2) provides that violations of the regulations governing the 

National Wildlife Refuge System—including 50 C.F.R. § 35.5, the charge in Count 1 in 

this case—may give rise to a fine under title 18, or imprisonment not more than 180 days,

or both. Per 18 U.S.C. §3559(a)(7), the offense is a Class B misdemeanor. The maximum 

fine for a Class B misdemeanor is $5,000 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3571(b)(6). Under 18 

U.S.C. § 3561(c)(2), for a misdemeanor, the Court may impose a term of probation not 

more than five years. 18 U.S.C. § 3562 provides that the court is to consider § 3553(a) 

Case 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 154 Filed 02/21/20 Page 1 of 4
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

factors (to the extent they are applicable) in determining whether to impose a term of 

probation and in determining the term and conditions. Dr. Warren requests that the court 

impose no fine or term of imprisonment or probation; if the Court does order probation, it 

should be brief and unsupervised.

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), this Court should consider:

The nature and circumstances of the offense

As this Court recognized the religious nature of Dr. Warren’s actions – and found only that 

his religion did not require him to drive on the restricted road in order to deliver life-saving 

supplies and recover human remains—the Court is aware that Dr. Warren nonetheless viewed 

these actions as an exercise of religious beliefs. Although the Court has determined that Dr. 

Warren’s decision to use a road in a wilderness area to access the parts of the desert where the 

highest concentration of bodies has been found violated a fish and wildlife service regulation, 

there can be no question that Dr. Warren undertook his actions with the laudable goal of 

preventing death and suffering. Indeed, No More Deaths, the organization with which he was 

working, was just awarded the ALBA/Puffin Award for Human Rights Activism,1 which comes 

with a cash prize of $100,000, as well as the Unitarian Universalist Association’s Wilton Peace 

Prize.2

1 https://uuctucson.org/106-no-more-deaths/no-more-deaths/4583-nmd-winds-alba-puffin-awardfor-human-rights-activis.html

2 https://uuctucson.org/106-no-more-deaths/no-more-deaths/1765-nmd-awarded-uua-qwiltonpeace-prizeq.html

Case 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 154 Filed 02/21/20 Page 2 of 4
3

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

The history and characteristics of the defendant

As court knows, throughout the pendency of this case Dr. Warren was on supervised 

release from the felony charges the government unsuccessfully brought against him (18-cr-223), 

with no problems. Indeed, he endured approximately 22 months of what amounted to supervised 

probation for a crime he did not commit. He is a pillar of the Ajo community and a respected 

scholar and teacher. 

The purposes of the sentence

The sentence should “reflect the seriousness of the offense, [] promote respect for the law, 

and [] provide just punishment for the offense.” Given the acknowledged prevalence with which 

others—including the Border Patrol, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the private citizens to 

whom they grant special use permits—drive on exactly these same roads, and the fact that at no 

point in this case have there been any allegations that Dr. Warren caused any harm to anyone or 

anything, only the most minimal of punishments could be appropriate.

A sentence should also “afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct.” As the events of 

this case have increasingly made clear, Dr. Warren and his colleagues have no desire to do 

anything criminal. Rather, they continue to engage in dialogue with the relevant agencies to 

identify mutually agreeable ways for the volunteers to do their life-saving work. Moreover, as Dr. 

Warren’s actions were an exercise of his religious beliefs,3 it would be inconsistent with our 

country’s clear commitment to religious freedom to intentionally deter him from acting on them.

3 The Court ruled that “Defendant’s religious beliefs did not compel him to drive his vehicle into the restricted area” and that “Defendant[] was not forced to enter by vehicle onto 

restricted land to exercise his religion.” Doc. 146 at 3. Dr. Warren continues to believe that 

such compulsion or force is not necessary to entitle him to continue to exercise his religion without fear of prosecution. But regardless, the Court did not find that his actions were not 

religious in nature. 

Case 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 154 Filed 02/21/20 Page 3 of 4
4

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

The statute also directs the Court to consider the need “to protect the public from further 

crimes of the defendant.” There is obviously no need to protect anyone from Dr. Warren. Nor is he 

in need of “educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment.” 

For these reasons, Dr. Warren requests that the Court impose no fine, imprisonment, or 

probation.

Respectfully submitted this 21st day of February, 2020

By: /s/ Gregory J. Kuykendall /s/ Amy P. Knight

Gregory J. Kuykendall Amy P. Knight

531 S Convent Avenue 3849 E Broadway Blvd #288

Tucson, AZ 85701 Tucson, AZ 85716

Attorneys for Defendant Scott Daniel Warren

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on February 21, 2020, 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 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 154 Filed 02/21/20 Page 4 of 4