Canandaigua Woman Charged with DWI
Melissa Feldman faces a driving while intoxicated charge, according to the Ontario County Sheriff's Office.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 5, 2026, 7:13 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 5, 2026, 7:24 a.m. ET
Canandaigua Woman Charged with DWI After Restaurant Incident
Melissa Feldman has been charged with driving while intoxicated, according to the Ontario County Sheriff's Office as reported by FingerLakes1.com. The charge stems from an incident in which the sheriff's office alleges Feldman drove to a restaurant while impaired.
The case remains at the charging stage, and no further proceedings have been reported. As with all charges, Feldman is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Sep 5, 2026, 7:13 a.m. ETFirst report
Canandaigua Woman Charged with DWI After Restaurant Incident
Melissa Feldman has been charged with driving while intoxicated, the Ontario County Sheriff's Office reported. The charge stems from an incident in which the sheriff's office alleges Feldman drove to a restaurant while impaired, according to fingerlakes1.com.
The case is at the charging stage and no trial has occurred. Feldman is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. The date of the alleged incident has not been established.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 11:24current
First published.
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 11:13current
First published.
- Version 15 Sept 2026, 11:52current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.