Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant's contention that the 2001 amendments to Executive Law § 632-a violated his equal protection and due process rights is improperly raised for the first time on appeal ( see Cibro Petroleum Prods. v. Chu, 67 NY2d 806; Melahn v. Hearn, 60 NY2d 944; Matter of Coleman v. Thomas, 295 AD2d 508; Matter of Burkins v. Scully, 108 AD2d 743). The defendant argued before the Supreme Court only that the amendments constituted an ex post facto violation, a claim which he has abandoned on appeal. In any event, the defendant's contention is without merit ( see Snuszki v. Wright, 193 Misc 2d 490, affd 1 AD3d 879).