Where the jury’s intent to convict on a specific offense is clear, a clerical error on the verdict form misidentifying the offense does not affect the validity of the verdict. Appellant was separately charged with robbery and carjacking as to each of the two victims. The guilty verdict form on count 2 alleged carjacking instead of robbery. The jury returned guilty verdicts on all the counts. The court rejected appellant’s argument that the conviction in count 2 violated the protection against double jeopardy by convicting appellant of the same carjacking twice. The information correctly charged the offense as robbery; the court instructed on robbery in count 2; the parties’ arguments conformed to the information and instructions, and the jury found defendant guilty as charged in count 2. Viewing the record as a whole, it was evident that the jury convicted appellant of robbery, count 2.