Gorham Man Charged with Criminal Mischief and Drug Possession
Kolten Lee Randall faces charges after investigators allege he damaged property and possessed fentanyl; the case remains undecided.
3 reports on this incident · first at Aug 31, 2026, 4:10 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 31, 2026, 4:16 a.m. ET
Gorham Man Charged with Criminal Mischief and Drug Possession
Kolten Lee Randall has been charged with third-degree criminal mischief and seventh-degree criminal possession of a controlled substance, according to the Ontario County Sheriff's Office. The charges stem from allegations that Randall damaged property belonging to a family member and possessed 0.5 grams of fentanyl, as reported by fingerlakes1.com.
Randall has not been tried, and the case remains undecided. As with all charges, he is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Sentencing has not yet been scheduled. The charges stem from an incident investigated by the Ontario County Sheriff's Office.
Aug 31, 2026, 4:10 a.m. ETFirst report
Gorham Man Charged After Domestic Incident, Fentanyl Seizure
Kolten Lee Randall has been charged with third-degree criminal mischief and seventh-degree criminal possession of a controlled substance, according to the Ontario County Sheriff's Office, as reported by FingerLakes1.com. The charges stem from an incident in which investigators allege Randall damaged property belonging to a family member and possessed 0.5 grams of fentanyl. The date of the alleged incident has not been established.
Randall is charged but has not been tried; charges are allegations and he is presumed innocent. The investigation is ongoing, and the case remains at the charging stage. As of now, the matter is undecided and has not been resolved in court.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 131 Aug 2026, 08:16current
First published.
- Version 131 Aug 2026, 08:10current
First published.
- Version 131 Aug 2026, 08:20current
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.