FirstAlerts

Two Plead Guilty in Fatal Synthetic Opioid Distribution Case

Oklahoma City men admit distributing cychlorphine linked to a death.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 4, 2026, 3:11 p.m. ET
Two Oklahoma men guilty to distributing a controlled substance analogue, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Oklahoma announced on September 4, 2026. Collin Shane Kirby, 21, of Oklahoma City, and Shane Michael Burgess, 24, of Mustang, admitted to roles in distributing cychlorphine, a synthetic opioid, according to the announcement. Court records state that on December 12, 2025, Kirby sold pills to Burgess, who then resold them to another individual who died as a result of using the drug. Kirby and Burgess were charged in July and August by separate superseding informations. At sentencing, each faces up to 20 years in federal prison and fines up to $1,000,000. Kirby also admitted to distributing cychlorphine to a minor on February 7, 2026. The cases were investigated by the DEA and the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, and are being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Joynes.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 14 Sept 2026, 19:11current

    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.