Does the abstract of judgment need to be amended to reflect that as to count 1, defendant was convicted of shooting at an occupied building rather than motor vehicle?

The respondent urges that the abstract of judgment should be corrected to reflect that as to count 1, defendant was sentenced to state prison for life with the possibility of parole, rather than without the possibility of parole, and that as to count 2, defendant was convicted of shooting at an occupied building, rather than an occupied motor vehicle. We agree that the abstract of judgment must be amended to conform to the trial court's pronouncement of judgment. (People v. Mitchell (2001) 26 Cal.4th 181, 188.)