govinfo:USCOURTS-akd-4_25-cr-00020-2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
 
 Plaintiff, 
 
vs. 
 
VINCENT LAWRENCE ROBERTS, 
 
 Defendant. 
 
 

 
 
ORDER DENYING 
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO 
SUPPRESS AND GRANTING 
MOTION TO SEVER 
 
(Docket nos. 33 & 59) 
 
 Defendant, Vincent Lawrence Roberts, is now before this Court with a 
Motion to Suppress Evidence and Statements1 and a Motion to Sever Counts.2 Both 
motions were objected to by the Government. The Magistrate Judge held an 
evidentiary hearing on April 2, 2026, regarding the Motion to Suppress. No hearing 
was held regarding the Motion to Sever Counts. 
The Magistrate Judge recommended that both motions be denied.3 Defendant 
has filed Objections to both. 4 After considering all the relevant papers, the Court 
 
1 Docket 33. 
2 Docket 59. 
3 Docket nos. 77 & 78. 
4 Docket nos. 79 & 80. 

 Page 2 
Accepts and Adopts the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge denying the 
Motion to Suppress Evidence and Statements but concludes that severance should 
be granted as to Count 1. 
A. Motion to Suppress Evidence and Statements 
Defendant seeks suppression of all evidence obtained by law enforcement 
during his arrest on December 28, 2024, and suppression of his statements made 
following his apprehension and detention after the December 28, 2024, traffic stop, 
search, and arrest. For the reasons set forth by the Government, and given the furtive 
conduct of Defendant throughout his encounter with law enforcement, as well as 
the ever-increasing discovery of incriminating items (i.e. the drugs, alcohol and a 
firearm), the Court concludes that it was not unreasonable to extend the length of the 
police contact until Defendant’s identity was confirmed. Moreover, given the 
increasing level of reasonable suspicion on the part of law enforcement, and 
considering the totality of circumstances, it would have been unreasonable to permit 
Defendant to depart the scene earlier. The Motion to Suppress at Docket 33 is 
DENIED. 
B. Motion to Sever Counts 
 Regarding the Motion to Sever, given the temporal and geographical distance 
between Count 1 and the remaining counts, and for the reasons argued by Defendant, 
the Court concludes that severance of Count 1 from the remaining counts is in the 

 Page 3 
interest of justice and that two separate trials must be held. The Motion to Sever at 
Docket 59 is GRANTED. 
CONCLUSION 
The Court has reserved the first week of November for one trial and the third 
week of November for the second. The Government shall notify Defendant of the 
order of the trials on or before June 18, 2026. 
Given that a continuance of the trial of this matter is in the interest of justice 
as well as in the interest of Defendant and the community, the speedy trial clock 
shall be tolled until the first day of trial as set forth above. 
 
 IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of June, 2026, at Anchorage, Alaska. 
 
 /s/ Ralph R. Beistline 
 RALPH R. BEISTLINE 
 Senior United States District Judge 

Passage view · GavelSight