The defendant appeals. "In establishing an offender's appropriate risk level under SORA, the People ‘bear the burden of proving the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence’ " ( People v. Watkins, 168 A.D.3d 1007, 1007–1008, 91 N.Y.S.3d 246, quoting Correction Law § 168–n[3] ; seePeople v. Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050–1051, 141 N.Y.S.3d 314 ). In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (seePeople v. Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051, 141 N.Y.S.3d 314 ; SORA: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 5 [2006] [hereinafter Guidelines]).

On appeal, the defendant challenges the assessment of points under certain risk factors. "In establishing an offender's appropriate risk level under SORA, the People ‘bear the burden of proving the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence’ " ( People v. Watkins, 168 A.D.3d 1007, 1007–1008, 91 N.Y.S.3d 246, quoting Correction Law § 168–n[3] ; seePeople v. Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050–1051, 141 N.Y.S.3d 314 ). "In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders" ( People v. Jones, 197 A.D.3d 1348, 1349, 151 N.Y.S.3d 904 ; see People v. Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051, 141 N.Y.S.3d 314 ).

Under risk factor 5 of the Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary (2006) (hereinafter Guidelines), 30 points are assessed if the victim was aged 10 or less, and 20 points are assessed if the victim was aged 11 through 16 (see Guidelines at 11). At a hearing pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C; hereinafter SORA), "the People must prove the facts to support a SORA risk-level classification by clear and convincing evidence" (People v Howard, 27 N.Y.3d 337, 341; see Correction Law § 168-n[3]; People v Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d 563, 571; People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050-1051). "In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders" (People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Guidelines at 5; People v Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d at 571-572; People v Welch, 126 A.D.3d 773, 773).

Under risk factor 5 of the Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary (2006) (hereinafter Guidelines), 30 points are assessed if the victim was aged 10 or less, and 20 points are assessed if the victim was aged 11 through 16 (see Guidelines at 11). At a hearing pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6–C; hereinafter SORA), "the People must prove the facts to support a SORA risk-level classification by clear and convincing evidence" ( People v. Howard, 27 N.Y.3d 337, 341, 33 N.Y.S.3d 132, 52 N.E.3d 1158 ; see Correction Law § 168–n[3] ; People v. Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d 563, 571, 883 N.Y.S.2d 154, 910 N.E.2d 983 ; People v. Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050–1051, 141 N.Y.S.3d 314 ).

"In establishing an offender's appropriate risk level under SORA, the People 'bear the burden of proving the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence"' (People v Watkins, 168 A.D.3d 1007, 1007-1008, quoting Correction Law § 168-n[3]; see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050-1051). In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051; SORA: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 5 [2006] [hereinafter Guidelines]).

"In establishing an offender's appropriate risk level under SORA, the People 'bear the burden of proving the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence"' (People v Watkins, 168 A.D.3d 1007, 1007-1008, quoting Correction Law § 168-n[3]; see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050-1051). In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051; SORA: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 5 [2006] [hereinafter Guidelines]).

Under risk factor 5 of the Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary (2006) (hereinafter Guidelines), 30 points are assessed if the victim was aged 10 or less, and 20 points are assessed if the victim was aged 11 through 16 (see Guidelines at 11). At a hearing pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C; hereinafter SORA), "the People must prove the facts to support a SORA risk-level classification by clear and convincing evidence" (People v Howard, 27 N.Y.3d 337, 341; see Correction Law § 168-n[3]; People v Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d 563, 571; People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050-1051). "In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders" (People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Guidelines at 5; People v Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d at 571-572; People v Welch, 126 A.D.3d 773, 773).

Under risk factor 5 of the Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary (2006) (hereinafter Guidelines), 30 points are assessed if the victim was aged 10 or less, and 20 points are assessed if the victim was aged 11 through 16 (see Guidelines at 11). At a hearing pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C; hereinafter SORA), "the People must prove the facts to support a SORA risk-level classification by clear and convincing evidence" (People v Howard, 27 N.Y.3d 337, 341; see Correction Law § 168-n[3]; People v Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d 563, 571; People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050-1051). "In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders" (People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Guidelines at 5; People v Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d at 571-572; People v Welch, 126 A.D.3d 773, 773).

The defendant appeals. "In establishing an offender's appropriate risk level under SORA, the People 'bear the burden of proving the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence"' (People v Watkins, 168 A.D.3d 1007, 1007-1008, quoting Correction Law § 168-n[3]; see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050-1051). In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051; SORA: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 5 [2006] [hereinafter Guidelines]).

The defendant appeals. "In establishing an offender's appropriate risk level under SORA, the People 'bear the burden of proving the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence"' (People v Watkins, 168 A.D.3d 1007, 1007-1008, quoting Correction Law § 168-n[3]; see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d 1050, 1050-1051). In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, and any relevant materials and evidence submitted by the parties, including reliable hearsay evidence, which may come from, among other documents, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, or case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (see People v Lopez, 192 A.D.3d at 1051; SORA: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 5 [2006] [hereinafter Guidelines]).