context: It cannot be disputed that Count One's language sets out the generic elements of burglary. Indeed, we have considered several cases in which defendants pleaded guilty or nolo contendere to charging papers materially indistinguishable from those used to charge Velasco-Medina, and in each case we held that their convictions fit Taylor's generic definition.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 235 F.3d 1170, 1170
citation_a.parenthetical: noting that document charging that Franklin "did willfully and unlawfully enter ... with the intent to commit larceny" satisfied Taylor
citation_a.sentence: See also Franklin, 235 F.3d at 1170 (noting that document charging that Franklin “did willfully and unlawfully enter ... with the intent to commit larceny” satisfied Taylor).
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.identifier: 5 F.3d 1322, 1325
citation_b.parenthetical: holding that Information charging burglary did not satisfy Taylor because of failure to allege "unlawful or unprivileged" entry
citation_b.sentence: Cf. United States v. Parker, 5 F.3d 1322, 1325 (9th Cir.1993) (holding that Information charging burglary did not satisfy Taylor because of failure to allege “unlawful or unprivileged” entry).