Can a conviction in North Carolina state court involving the breaking and entering of outbuildings (storage sheds) that were visibly and actually padlocked from the outside, where no reasonable person could or would infer they were any inhabitants, be used as predicate offenses for the purpose of enhancing a sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA)?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Can a conviction in. North Carolina state couct iaveluing the breaking and entering of outlouilA ing s Ce. Stocage Sheds ) tnat were visably and actually Pad locked Prom the outside, where no reasoneble person Jucdst oc olor wise , Could infer tyre were Ang inhabitants , be used as Predicate offenses fur tre Purpose of en hencina a sentence under dre Armed Caceer Criminal Ack CAcctr) © Did lower Court ere When it looked behind EAuard's Conviction for bresking and entering under North Carolina State [aw ia seaycr of Vecovd evidence that he adwally Committed the Qenecte offense of © bucglacy” under the ACCK and sek that Finding to enhance a sentence i+ impored after the defendant uas convicted of violating 1G USC. § 122 (g) ? Was Edward's deprived tre Sixta Amend ment rg ht bo eMLective Counsel because his attorney erroneously avgued tuat the First Step Act oF Qol® somehow Changed tie language of tne AccA, rather then Cocrectly Pdenti Cy and avgue tie mecits of te case °