PEOPLE v. MELENDEZ

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

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's determination designating him a level three sex offender was supported by clear and convincing evidence ( see Correction Law § 168-n; People v O'Neal, 26 AD3d 365; People v Glenn, 24 AD3d 427; People v Johnson, 23 AD3d 635; People v Gambetta, 19 AD3d 571).

The defendant failed to present clear and convincing evidence of the existence of special circumstances to warrant a downward departure from his presumptive risk level as determined by the risk assessment instrument ( see People v Davis, 26 AD3d 364; People v Masters, 19 AD3d 387; People v Williams, 19 AD3d 388).