—[*1] Richard M. Greenberg, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Christina Graves of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Timothy C. Stone of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth L. Sussman, J.), entered on or about March 9, 2005, which adjudicated defendant a level three sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant's claim that he does not qualify as a sex offender is similar to the claim made by the defendant in People v Cintron (46 AD3d 353 [2007], lv denied 10 NY3d 804 [2008]). For the reasons stated in Cintron, we find this claim to be both unpreserved and without merit (see also People v Windham, 37 AD3d 571 [2007], affd 10 NY3d 801 [2008]). To the extent that defendant is asserting that it is unconstitutional to determine his qualification as a sex offender on the basis of an administrative computation of his aggregate sentence made in accordance with Penal Law § 70.30, we likewise find that claim to be unpreserved and meritless.

Defendant did not establish any special circumstances warranting a downward departure from his risk level (see People v Guaman, 8 AD3d 545 [2004]). Concur—Gonzalez, J.P., Catterson, McGuire and Moskowitz, JJ.