USA v. Stoltenberg et al

United States v. Stoltenberg
3:18-cr-00109-TMB-MMS
ORDER on Motion for Clarification of Defendant’s Claim
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
IN THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
EDWIN ALLEN STOLTENBERG,
Defendant.
3:18-cr-00109-TMB-MMS
ORDER ON GOVERNMENT’S MOTION
TO CLARIFY STOLTENBERG’S
PURGE CLAIMS
[DKT. 347]
On March 20, 2020, the Government filed “Government’s Motion to Clarify Stoltenberg’s
Purge Claims.” [Dkt. 347]. The Motion requests that the Court order Stoltenberg to clarify, in
writing, his recently made claims of “spoliation” of jail calls. [Dkt. 347 at 1]. Subsequent to that
Motion, Stoltenberg filed at Docket 383, First MOTION to Dismiss Due USAO Prosecutorial
Misconduct.
Although not styled as such, Stoltenberg’s motion at Docket 383 was intended as a
response to the Government’s request for clarification. Stoltenberg’s motion set forth nine (9)
requests for relief, which were accompanied by points and authorities in support thereof. Without
commenting on the merits of Stotenberg’s claims for relief, his motion at Docket 383, does
substantially address the Government’s Motion to Clarify.
Moreover, this Court has held extensive evidentiary hearings to address Stoltenberg’s
claims that the Government deliberately, or negligently, allowed SECURUS/Alaska Department
of Corrections to delete purported recordings of Attorney-Client communications. The request for
clarification at Docket 347 is, therefore, MOOT.
Case 3:18-cr-00109-JMK-MMS Document 632 Filed 04/06/21 Page 1 of 2

United States v. Stoltenberg
3:18-cr-00109-TMB-MMS
ORDER on Motion for Clarification of Defendant’s Claim
The second prong in the Government’s Motion is to require Stoltenberg to articulate his
spoilation claim. Stoltenberg’s motion, at Docket 383, addresses the act of deleting Attorney-
Client phone calls, but does not use the term “spoliation” specifically. His motion does, however,
assert that evidence was “purged and destroyed1”. [Dkt. 383 at 18.] This Court interprets the claim
of evidence being “purged and destroyed,” within Stoltenberg’s motion to dismiss [Id.], as
elucidating the spoliation claim, satisfying the second prong of the Government’s request. The
request for Stoltenberg to put the spoliation claim in writing is, accordingly, MOOT.
THEREFORE, the “Government’s Motion to Clarify Stoltenberg’s Purge Claims” at
Docket 347 is DENIED as MOOT.
DATED this 6th day of April 2021, at Anchorage, Alaska.
s/ Matthew M. Scoble
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
1 Also rendered as “purged / destroyed.” Dkt 383 at 18.
Case 3:18-cr-00109-JMK-MMS Document 632 Filed 04/06/21 Page 2 of 2