Does a court have to change a minute order after a jury found defendant not guilty of possession of methamphetamine?

Defendant contends that the trial court's minute order following the jury verdict erroneously states that he was convicted of possession of methamphetamine. The People concede the point, and we agree. Accordingly, we will order the trial court to generate a new minute order reflecting that the jury found defendant not guilty of possession of methamphetamine. (People v. Mitchell (2001) 26 Cal.4th 181, 185 [appellate courts may correct clerical errors in the record].) Because the abstract of judgment does not contain this error, it need not be modified.

Page 10