FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Marlinton Man Pleads Guilty to Methamphetamine and Firearm Charges in Northern West Virginia

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of West Virginia says Charles Robert Calhoun, 40, entered the plea on August 7, 2026; sentencing is still to come.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 8, 2026, 12:12 a.m. ET
A Marlinton, West Virginia man has guilty to drug and firearm charges, according to a press release issued by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of West Virginia on August 7, 2026. The office said Charles Robert Calhoun, 40, guilty that day to possessing more than 50 grams of methamphetamine and to possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug crime. The announcement was made by U.S. Attorney Matthew L. Harvey. According to the filed plea agreement and statements made in court, as described in the release, officers seized a pistol, four bags containing 141 grams of methamphetamine, $3,630, and drug paraphernalia. The release states that at the time of the traffic stop Calhoun was on state home confinement, and that a court-ordered home check of his residence led to a search warrant, after which investigators seized 11 firearms and three sets of digital scales. The office said Calhoun faces 10 years to life in prison on the drug charge and a consecutive 5 years and up to life on the firearms charge. Any sentence will be determined by a federal district court judge after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. The case remains open at the sentencing stage; no sentencing date appears in the record. Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Warner is prosecuting the case, according to the release. The Mountain Region Drug Task Force, a HIDTA-funded initiative, and the West Virginia State Police investigated, and U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi presided. The Justice Department record lists the matter under its Operation Take Back America, drug trafficking and firearms offenses topics.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 18 Aug 2026, 04:12current

    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.