JOSHUA BROUGHTON,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA,

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

See Monroe v. State, 201 So. 3d 70, 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (“[A] defendant cannot properly [establish the imposition of a habitual offender sentence was illegal] under rule 3.800(a) where he fails to affirmatively allege that the predicate prior convictions do not exist as a matter of law.”) (citations omitted); see also Malone v. State, 225 So. 3d 335 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (As “the error was a scrivener’s error, not judicial error, which when corrected will not affect the defendant’s sentence . . . , the judgment may be corrected without conducting a new sentencing hearing.”); Rolling v. State, 215 So. 3d 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (The “failure to object to a technical deficiency in the charging document prior to the jury’s verdict constitutes a waiver.”) (citations omitted); Delgado v. State, 43 So. 3d 132, 134-35 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (finding information that stated the “defendant possessed a firearm” and cited to section 775.087, Florida Statutes, was sufficient to allow for enhancement of actual possession of a firearm).