How have courts interpreted a probation officer's report?

^10. The fact the trial court disagreed with the probation officer's report is of no moment. (See People v. Kronemyer (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 314, 366 [probation officer's report and recommendation "are advisory only, constituting aids to the sentencing court in its exercise of discretion in determining an appropriate disposition, and thus may be rejected in their entirety"], italics added.)

^11. Because we conclude the trial court's selection of the upper term was supported by one valid aggravating factor, we need not determine the validity of the other aggravating factors the trial court cited. (See People v. Forster (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1746, 1759 [error in considering invalid aggravating factor is harmless if "there remains one unassailable valid factor in aggravation"].)