Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), dated November 13, 2014, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The defendant appeals from an order designating him a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (see Correction Law art 6-C; hereinafter SORA).
“In establishing a defendant’s risk level pursuant to SORA, the People bear the burden of establishing the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence” (People v Crandall, 90 AD3d 628, 629 [2011]; see Correction Law § 168-n [3]). “In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant’s admissions, the victim’s statements, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation offi *911 cer, parole officer, or corrections counselor, case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders . . . , or any other reliable source, including reliable hearsay” (People v Crandall, 90 AD3d at 629). Here, the Supreme Court properly assessed 15 points against the defendant under risk factor 11 and 15 points against him under risk factor 12. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the assessment of these points was supported by clear and convincing evidence in the record. Accordingly, the court properly designated the defendant a level three sex offender.