How have courts dealt with clerical errors in sentencing sentences?

For example, in Brownlee v. Romorro, the state trial court orally sentenced the defendant to seventeen years-to-life. No. 14-CV-1990-LJO-SAB(HC), 2015 WL 1013154, at *4 (E.D. Cal. March 6, 2015). However, the sentence was erroneously recorded as fifteen years-to-life. Id. The state court then issued an amended judgment correcting the error. Id. On habeas review, the district court found this to be clerical error, specifically noting that "[t]he trial court did not reconsider the correctness of the original sentence and independently decide to impose a seventeen years to life sentence. The trial court did not receive evidence or reopen any issue . . . [it] simply exercised its ability to correct a clerical error by amending the judgment." Id. Thus, the statute of limitations period was not reset by the entry of the amended judgment. Id. at *5.