Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly assessed him 20 points under risk factor number 4 (continuing course of sexual misconduct), based on clear and convincing evidence that the defendant engaged in several acts of sexual contact with the child victim over a period of approximately 2 years ( see People v Mingo, 49 AD3d 148 [2nd Dept 2008]; People v Atkinson, 34 AD3d 551; People v Terdeman, 175 Misc 2d 379, 382-384).
The defendant was also properly assessed 15 points under risk factor number 12, based on his failure to accept responsibility for the underlying offenses, coupled with his expulsion from a sex offender treatment program in 2001 ( see People v Lewis, 37 AD3d 689; People v Morales, 33 AD3d 982). Moreover, the Supreme Court properly assessed 15 points under risk factor number 14 because of the defendant's unsupervised release from prison ( see People v Lewis, 37 AD3d 689).
In light of the above, the defendant was properly designated a level two sex offender.