People v Muirhead

Annotate this Case
People v Muirhead 2009 NY Slip Op 08713 [67 AD3d 1258] November 25, 2009 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 6, 2010

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William S. Muirhead, Jr., Appellant.

—[*1] Lisa A. Burgess, Indian Lake, for appellant.

Nicole M. Duve, District Attorney, Canton (Victoria Esposito of counsel), for respondent.

Cardona, P.J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Richards, J.), rendered October 20, 2008, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of course of sexual conduct against a child in the second degree.

Defendant was charged in a six-count indictment with various crimes arising out of his sexual abuse of a young victim and subsequent efforts to intimidate her into recanting her allegations. County Court denied defendant's motion to suppress certain statements he made to a caseworker with the St. Lawrence County Department of Social Services. Thereafter, defendant pleaded guilty to one count of course of sexual conduct against a child in the second degree in full satisfaction of the indictment and executed a written waiver of appeal during the plea colloquy. As agreed, County Court sentenced defendant to a prison term of three years and postrelease supervision of three years. Defendant appeals.

We affirm. Defendant's sole argument on appeal, that County Court improperly denied his suppression motion, is precluded by his waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; People v Schmidt, 57 AD3d 1104, 1104 [2008]). Moreover, defendant makes no effort to challenge the validity of that appeal waiver, and our review of the record reveals that his waiver was knowing, intelligent and voluntary given County Court's explanation [*2]of the consequences of the waiver and defendant's acknowledgment during the plea colloquy that he understood the terms thereof (see People v Leonard, 63 AD3d 1278, 1278 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 797 [2009]; People v Tabbott, 61 AD3d 1183, 1184 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 750 [2009]).

Mercure, Spain, Malone Jr. and Kavanagh, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.