PEOPLE v. BAEZ

Although defendant challenges a particular 15-point assessment, even without that assessment he would remain a level two offender, and we find no basis for a discretionary downward departure from defendant's presumptive risk level ( see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 568 n 2 [2009]; People v Johnson, 11 NY3d 416, 421). The mitigating circumstances cited by defendant were adequately taken into account by the risk assessment instrument.