Defendant's argument that the court incorrectly assessed certain risk factor points is academic, because it is undisputed that even without the five points at issue, defendant would still qualify as a level three sex offender. Defendant's argument for a downward departure is unpreserved because he made no such request to the hearing court. In any event, there is no basis in the record for such a departure ( see People v Mabb, 32 AD3d 1135).