We affirm appellant’s conviction for attempted first degree murder with a weapon, as well as domestic aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, for attempting to kill his ex-girlfriend by dousing her with gasoline and igniting it. Although appellant claims that the evidence was insufficient to prove a premeditated intent to kill, there was more than ample evidence of such an intent. And while it appears that appellant’s best evidence objection to testimony relating the contents of a voice message from appellant may have been properly denied based upon section 90.954(3), Florida Statutes (2013), even if error, the admission of the testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

We remand, however, to delete the judgment of conviction’s reference to a “deadly” weapon on the attempted first degree murder charge, as it appears to be a clerical error. The jury verdict found appellant guilty of attempted first degree murder and that he did “actually carry, display, use, threaten to use, or attempt to use a weapon ” during the attempt, which finding was consistent with the charge in the information. Thus, the inclusion of “deadly” in the judgment for attempted murder convicted him of a crime of which the jury did not find him guilty. This correction makes no difference in appellant’s sentence.

Affirmed but remanded to correct judgment of conviction.