Can a judge rely on a probation report to determine the factual basis for a finding of criminal intent?

^1. The parties stipulated the trial court could use the probation report for the factual basis. There are two supplemental probation reports contained in the record on appeal, both dated February 4, 2016. Neither contains the facts underlying the convictions. It appears from the reporter's transcript and one of the supplemental probation reports that there is at least one earlier probation report dated September 17, 2015; there is also reference to a supplemental probation report filed on January 6, 2016. Neither the September 2015 nor January 2016 probation reports are contained in the record on appeal. We contacted the trial court in an effort to obtain these reports and were advised the trial court could not find these reports or any additional references to them.

^2. People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.

^3. Under Lent, "A condition of probation will not be held invalid unless it '(1) has no relationship to the crime of which the offender was convicted, (2) relates to conduct which is not in itself criminal, and (3) requires or forbids conduct which is not reasonably related to future criminality . . . .' [Citation.] Conversely, a condition of probation which requires or forbids conduct which is not itself criminal is valid if that conduct is reasonably related to the crime of which the defendant was convicted or to future criminality." (People v. Lent (1975) 15 Cal.3d 481, 486.)