With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Jerry Williams appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. Williams alleges that his sentences do not conform to the oral pronouncement made at sentencing. Such a claim is cognizable in a rule 3.800 proceeding. See Dawson/Knapp v. State, 698 So.2d 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). The trial court did not attach any record documents which refute Williams’ claim. Therefore, we reverse and remand. On remand the trial court shall review the record and determine whether there is a discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and written sentences. If there is, the written sentencing documents shall be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement. See, e.g., Brammer v. State, 554 So.2d 671 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (<HOLDING>). If the trial court determines that there is

A: holding that where there is a discrepancy between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement of sentence the latter prevails
B: holding that when there is a variation between the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written memorialization of the sentence the oral pronouncement controls
C: holding that a trial courts changing of the written sentence to conform with the oral pronouncement of sentence is ministerial
D: holding that in cases of direct conflict between a courts oral pronouncement of sentence and the written judgment the oral pronouncement controls
A.