FRANCKY LOUIS

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA

PER CURIAM.

In his pro se motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, appellant Francky Louis alleged five grounds to vacate his convictions for attempted first-degree murder and armed burglary. At the evidentiary hearing on his motion, appellant was represented by counsel who conceded Grounds One, Two, Three and Five. The hearing proceeded on Ground Four, wherein appellant asserted that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to cross-examine the victim about the number of beers the victim had consumed during the evening of the crime.

After conducting the evidentiary hearing, the trial court concluded that appellant’s trial counsel’s decision not to cross-examine the victim on the point was trial strategy. The trial court then entered the challenged order denying appellant’s post-conviction motion. We affirm because the trial court’s order is supported by competent, substantial evidence adduced at the evidentiary hearing. Williams v. State, 808 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).

As stipulated by the parties, the trial court’s order contains a scrivener’s error. The order misidentifies as Ground Five – rather than Ground Four – the ground upon which the trial court conducted the evidentiary hearing. While we affirm the order, we remand to the trial court to correct the scrivener’s error. Affirmed; remanded to correct scrivener’s error.