of the defendant’s prior adjudication was sufficient to satisfy the government’s burden. Id. at 1039; see also United States v. Potter, 895 F.2d 1231, 1238 (9th Cir.1990) (declining to “foreclose the possibility that a defendant’s conviction ... might be established by some other form of clearly reliable evidence”). In satisfying its evidentiary burden to prove career offender status, the government may rely on certified copies of convictions. However, a court may also confirm a defendant’s previous convictions by relying on the terms of the plea agreement, the charging document, the transcript of colloquy between judge and defendant, or other comparable judicial records of sufficient reliability. See Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13, 16, 125 S.Ct. 1254, 161 L.Ed.2d 205 (2005) (<HOLDING>). Addressing this issue, other circuits assess
holding that inquiry under the acca to determine statutory elements of prior conviction is limited to judicial records and may not include documents that simply state facts such as police reports holding that courts should look to the statutory definition of the crime charged rather than the actual facts of the individuals prior conviction to determine whether the crime qualifies as a violent felony under the acca holding that a court can look only to the statutory elements charging documents and jury instructions to determine whether an earlier conviction after trial qualified as a violent felony under the acca holding that a district court may review shepard documents to determine the factual nature of prior convictions for acca purposes including whether they were committed on different occasions recognizing a general right to inspect and copy public records and documents including judicial records and documents