PEOPLE v. BRANIGAN

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The People met their burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant should be designated a level three sex offender ( see Correction Law art 6-C; People v Goldenberg, 17 AD3d 433; People v Dong V. Dao, 9 AD3d 401). In requesting a downward departure to a designation as a level two sex offender, the defendant failed to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, the existence of a mitigating factor or factors of a kind or to a degree not otherwise taken into account by the guidelines ( see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 4 [2006]; see People v Rivera, 51 AD3d 646, 647, lv denied 11 NY3d 704; People v Taylor, 48 AD3d 775).