Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's determination to designate him a level three sex offender is supported by clear and convincing evidence, including, inter alia, the complainant's grand jury testimony and other "reliable hearsay evidence" (Correction Law § 168-n; see People v Davis, 26 AD3d 364; People v Await, 17 AD3d 336; People v Thomas, 300 AD2d 379 [2002]). In determining the defendant's total risk factor score, the Supreme Court was not limited to the single charge of sexual abuse in the first degree to which the defendant pleaded guilty ( see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 5 [1997 ed]), but could also consider other relevant facts supported by clear and convincing evidence ( see People v Saleemi, 186 Misc 2d 177, 180 [2000]).