Whether the district court erred in imposing an ambiguous oral sentence that is contrary to the written judgment

No question identified. : _eemining_ offerse level on multiple covnts Boia _ CHen Judgment > Which Sentence asnena lly Coolols | Bule J(D) A_lisof_all_parties ts the_prowediing — lin the Court labore. Sudament fs Seve ste be. RMIE . Ramone _Livight (Appellanf) “[Bennctevilefer __ 109 Box Bango Renrelisville Sc, AIGIQ. jn_thiS Couct,Sowing «09/09/2032 criming|_cose Dackeked, Wodice Eller pa tee ony Benes Lea — Couch of Appears Docket" 92°3103 (See PxhibrtAW) (9)) the district courck southern _ Of Obi 0 ESS Dulis.00 ese NOs 3 ec Correction oF Record _pususiat to_Rule3@ Th_consunctian_lunh transcript Filed OB/OULIT ECP NO.S_4,S pogeno Is), Sib pogaty |S)y 4 psetois)_ = Ora) Senierce _iS_GimbiguouS.. Gind_cocheiy to tHae__ Lodtien lament —_MGthon for Contehen OF Barer Oenic — he oral Sentence prance 820 cenpaale ste tolal of 2 nat 5 OOS, =ho Hae LIne Nu ar ot ie. ___ Lions, See ExhibrbAl Grd Bo (Reason tor Granting pebiion.TO_preveak &_pais= ice micae Of Btce on peschies.. sentance_Uader_ , Bimlinc Citcumstuaces= Gnd 4c eras dine nek ob aderr ining he Dulolic_ Confidence iin Mee Qudicie| _