PEOPLE v. WASHINGTON

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

Contrary to the defendant's contention, his designation as a level three sex offender is supported by clear and convincing evidence ( see Correction Law § 168-n; People v Montalvo, 44 AD3d 919, lv denied 9 NY3d 817). Further, his contention that the hearing court's use of the risk assessment instrument prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders denied him due process is without merit ( see People v Windham, 37 AD3d 571, lv granted 8 NY3d 816; People v Flowers, 35 AD3d 690, lv denied 8 NY3d 810).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.