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 

MICHAEL BAILEY 

United States Attorney 

ANNA WRIGHT

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

NATHANIEL J. WALTERS 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

State Bar No.: 029708 

405 West Congress, Suite 4800 

Tucson, Arizona 85701-5040 

Telephone: (520) 620-7300 

E-mail: anna.wright@usdoj.gov 

 nathaniel.walters@usdoj.gov 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Scott Daniel Warren, 

 Defendant.

18-CR-223-TUC-RCC (DTF) 

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO 

PRECLUDE HYPOTHETICAL 

QUESTIONS ABOUT INFORMED 

CONSENT 

The United States of America, by and through its undersigned attorneys, hereby 

responds to the defendant’s Motion to Preclude Hypothetical Questions About Informed 

Consent. Doc. 323. The government respectfully requests that the Court deny the motion 

because it has no basis in law or fact. 

At trial, the defendant introduced the No More Deaths’ written protocols as an 

exhibit, elicited testimony about the protocols and associated training, and argued that the 

defendant did not intend to violate the law because he followed the protocols. The 

government cross-examined defense witnesses regarding the section of the protocols 

specifically related to calling 911 for illegal aliens in need of emergency medical care. The 

testimony showed that volunteers do not follow this section of the protocols as written and 

that at least some of the volunteers understand that avoiding immigration authorities is 

treated as an equal goal with providing medical care. See TR 6/5/19 at 122-23, 145-46. 
- 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 

This testimony was directly relevant to the witnesses’ bias and credibility. As such, this 

was proper impeachment and there is no basis for precluding this testimony at the retrial. 

Cross-examination on this issue also tended to show that, in conflating informed 

medical consent with legal advice, the protocols direct volunteers to take steps that will 

help illegal aliens avoid apprehension by immigration authorities and that the protocols are 

unreasonable as written. To the extent the defendant relies on the protocols as a legal excuse 

for his conduct, in this case, this testimony shows that his reliance is either unreasonable 

or that following the protocols can be consistent with intending to violate the law. As such, 

this testimony is directly relevant to the defendant’s intent and motive. In any event, 

through cross-examination, the government should be allowed to explore the limits of 

protocols the defendant allegedly followed to justify harboring illegal aliens contrary to 

law. 

For the reasons discussed above, the defendant’s motion should be denied. 

 Respectfully submitted this 4th day of October, 2019. 

 MICHAEL BAILEY 

United States Attorney 

District of Arizona 

 /s/ Anna R. Wright & Nathaniel J. Walters

 ANNA WRIGHT &

 NATHANIEL J. WALTERS 

 Assistant U.S. Attorneys 

Copy of the foregoing served electronically or by 

other means this 4th day of October, 2019, to: 

All ECF participants