Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the district court was as follows: Q: ... Now, you were convicted of abuse of a household member in the year 2000, correct? A: Yes. Q: And the charge that you were convicted of included you hitting — was it your former girlfriend? A: Yes ma’am. Q: Okay. And so you were convicted of hitting your former girlfriend? A. Yes. 2 . Another example is that the Hawaii statute applies to all "persons related by consanguinity,” including both "children” and “parents,” while the federal statute applies only to one specified blood relationship — that in which the defendant is the parent of the victim. 3 . The only document in the record that suggests how Nobriga’s assault met the section 709-906(1) standard is a police report, which we are barred by Shepard from considering. See 125 S.Ct. at 1263 . 4 . Such a post hoc admission is not
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that courts applying taylor may only look to the terms of the charging document the terms of a plea agreement or transcript of colloquy between judge and defendant in which the factual ba  sis for the plea was confirmed by the defen dant or to some comparable judicial record of this information
B. holding that in determining whether the defendant has a prior conviction for burglary under the armed career criminal act the federal court may look only to the terms of the charging document the terms of a plea agreement or transcript of colloquy between judge and defendant in which the factual basis for the plea was confirmed by the defendant or to some comparable judicial record of this information
C. holding that court could look only to the statutory definition of a crime the charging document written plea agreement transcript of plea colloquy and any explicit factual finding by the trial judge to which the defendant assented in determining if prior conviction qualified as a generic burglary for purposes of enhanced sentencing under armed career criminal act
D. holding that a courts inquiry as to disputed facts in connection with a prior conviction is limited to the terms of the charging document a plea agreement a transcript of the plea colloquy or a comparable judicial record
E. holding federal court is not bound by terms of plea agreement between defendant and state authorities
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.