Is a condition of probation valid as long as it is not related to the crime of the crime in which the offender was convicted?

In Lent, supra , 15 Cal.3d 481, 124 Cal.Rptr. 905, 541 P.2d 545, our high court held that 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 .... " ( Id . at p. 486, 124 Cal.Rptr. 905, 541 P.2d 545.) The Lent test is conjunctive: "all three prongs must be satisfied before a reviewing court will invalidate a probation term." ( People v. Olguin (2008) 45 Cal.4th 375, 379, 87 Cal.Rptr.3d 199, 198 P.3d 1 ( Olguin ).) "As such, even if a condition of probation has no relationship to the crime of which a defendant was convicted and involves conduct that is not itself criminal, the condition is valid as long as the condition is reasonably related to preventing future criminality." ( Id . at pp. 379-380, 87 Cal.Rptr.3d 199, 198 P.3d 1, italics added.)