Is the prosecution adequately plead the aggravated white collar crime enhancement and probation-exclusion provision?

Dunham contends the prosecution did not adequately plead the aggravated white collar crime enhancement and probation-exclusion provision. (See People v. Nilsson (2016) 242 Cal.App.4th 1, 16 [trial court imposed enhancement based on its own finding that grand theft count was related to bribery count, a relationship neither pleaded in the information nor found by the jury].) The parties apparently agree that the pleadings were sufficient through the fourth amended information, but then the statutory provisions became listed only in the "charge summary" of the fifth and sixth amended information. The People submit that certain text was inadvertently dropped due to a clerical error, which is fairly supported by the record. Dunham's counsel did not object to the sixth amended information or contend it was deficient in any manner.