Alignment is a mess, particularly Law and Chaos
I am almost certain that you will never find two people who define Law and Chaos exactly the same way. The books definitely don’t; there are actually different definitions of each such that the same action or person could be equally described as Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic, because the different definitions are not even mutually exclusive.
There is a reason no one ever published a Book of Perfect Dogma or Book of Unfettered Discord – no one has a very clear idea what it actually means to be lawful or chaotic. There’s a bit of that old saw that “I know it when I see it,” but particular situations can cause different people to see very different things.
So there is no way to answer this question perfectly; there is no way to play a rogue that will appear lawful to everyone.
That said, rogues don’t have any alignment requirements
Being a Rogue means you are highly-trained in a wide area of skills, particularly as relates to stealth, mobility, and exploration of dangerous areas. It means that, in combat, you are very quick to capitalize on others’ mistakes, but you are not a primary combatant and if you don’t get that opening you cannot stand toe-to-toe with the biggest, strongest, or best warrriors.
Note that rogues are not necessarily thieves or any other sort of criminal. The description you quote never actually says anything about how rogues interact with the law. In fact, none of their behavior sounds particularly chaotic to me: it sounds much more like they are prepared for a chaotic world. Someone who is personally chaotic may be better suited towards going with the flow and acting spontaneously as circumstances change, but not necessarily. A disciplined, lawful personality may prepare more options, train harder, be more ready to look at the big picture, enabling him to navigate the world’s lack of lawfulness.
Law and Chaos are probably most reasonably defined as how you deal with structure: do you find that structure provides support and nourishment, that you can use the structure to find and take advantage of opportunities? Or do you find that structure stifles you, prevents you from being true to yourself and inhibits your ability to make the most of your talents? Do you find lack of structure distracting, or even paralyzing, giving you no direction and providing no safety net? Or is it liberating, allowing you to be the best you can be? Those are the kinds of questions that Lawful and Chaotic individuals will always answer differently.
Lawful Good rogues are often explorers and travelers, possibly even diplomats, who seek to find answers to important question and settle problems in distant lands.
The quintessential good rogue, Robin Hood broke the law of the land, it’s true; the Sheriff of Nottingham certainly considered him a criminal. However, his extremely tight code of honor, about who could be stolen from and to whom money could go, belies a very lawful personality. He merely rejected the authority of those who wrote the law, and in many versions, he even has a legal argument backing that up (namely that the true monarch was King Richard, and that Prince Edward is abusing his brother’s absence). In many renditions, Robin is himself a nobleman illegally stripped of his lands, and at least some of his actions would have been legal if he had been recognized as the lord of the lands he operated in.
Batman is acrobatic, stealthy, theatrical, and brilliant. Again, he acts within a very strict code (see his refusal to kill, particularly the Joker). He’s a vigilante, but his actions are specifically an attempt to right the wrongs of a corrupted city; he is providing law enforcement where the laws are riddled with loopholes and the police force is overworked and underpaid (unless they’re getting bribes).
(Of course, there have been many depictions of Batman, and you can find cases where he acts out just about any of the alignments. There’s at least one meme image showing Batman for every alignment.)
Indiana Jones exhibits many of the traits of a rogue: leaping, balancing, sneaking, disarming traps, and opening locks. He is not a particularly excellent fighter, but he’s not useless in a fight either, and he knows how to take advantage of situations (e.g. see Raiders of the Lost Ark, specifically the fights against the swordsman while chasing Marion and against the strongman under the plane). Once again, he has a strong code of ethics (“That belongs in a museum!”) and is generally acting with legal sanction (barring his time in Nazi Germany, where his rejection of the Nazis’ authority could still be considered a lawful act, staying true to the laws and expectations of his own culture, and obviously would be a good act).
Neutrality is always a little tricky; there are several forms of it. There’s the balancing act, where the character performs both good and evil actions in relatively equal measure, and there’s the apathetic version, where the character ignores the questions of good and evil altogether. A rogue of the first sort might be a gangmember, a hitman or enforcer, perhaps, who is mostly just following orders, but has limits or a code that prevent certain actions deemed too immoral (e.g. he’ll murder a traitor, but not the traitor’s wife and kids). A rogue of the second sort may be a sanctioned representative of some government, and therefore working within the law (of that country) by definition, a diplomat or a spy, perhaps. Also, someone obsessed with revenge: vengeance is an attempt at justice, which is a very lawful notion, while the skills of a rogue are important for someone who is acting above and beyond what actual law enforcement can or will do.
Also, being named “The Verb-er” seems to help.
Less so in the later films, or even towards the end of the first, where he slides into good territory, but in The Transporter the title character has a very strict set of rules for his operation, and almost all of his initial involvement in the plot are following those laws or seeking revenge against those who broke them.
Also, the Transporter’s extreme skills with a car are similar to how the rogue works. Different skills available, of course, since there are not typically cars in Pathfinder, but still very much how the rogue works. His fighting style is very cerebral, creating and taking advantage of opportunities throughout his fights; very rogue.
The Punisher might not be modeled with the rogue class; certainly, even if he has a few levels in it, he’s got more in something a little harder-hitting. Still, he’s got skills, and he’s got the attitude of a lawful neutral rogue easily.
Lawful evil rogues are usually gangmembers, either hitmen and enforcers, or dons and kingpins. Their skills allow them to get in, get out, and make sure they never get pinned on it. They have ample access to the social skills necessary to control such an organization, too, along with a bit of the tricks and talents necessary to back it up.
As an outsider, as the kid who didn’t want to take part in the family business, Michael’s combat prowess and mettle were questioned constantly, particularly when it came time for him to act. Rogues are not front-line fighters, they are not usually physically imposing. But Michael could manipulate, sweet-talk, or terrify with the best of them, and he kept those facts very well hidden. He acted decisively and brutally, and no one saw it coming. Definitely could model that with a rogue.