The defendant failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that special circumstances existed warranting a downward departure from his presumptive risk level three designation. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in designating him a level three sex offender (see People v Maiello, 32 AD3d 463 [2006]; People v Guaman, 8 AD3d 545 [2004]; cf. People v Abdullah, 31 AD3d 515, 516 [2006]). Mastro, J.P., Florio, Miller and Dickerson, JJ., concur.