A defendant’s statement to the probation officer after his conviction cannot subsequently be used to prove that the offense constitutes a serious felony. In the current case, as proof of the prior conviction alleged as a serious felony, the prosecutor submitted a complaint alleging 273.5 (a) and 12022 (b); a reporter’s transcript of the proceeding in which appellant pled guilty to 273.5 (a) where the weapons enhancement was stricken; and a probation report in which appellant admitted stabbing the victim with a knife. The prosecution argued that this statement by appellant provided the necessary evidence to establish a “strike.” The trial court disagreed, concluding that the statement to the probation officer that he had used the knife could not be used because the enhancement had been stricken as part of the plea bargain. The lower court reversed, reasoning that the plea bargain striking the allegation of personal use did not prevent appellant’s statement to the probation officer to prove that the offense was a strike in a subsequent action. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding that a statement by a defendant as reflected in a post conviction probation report was not part of the record of conviction on appeal. People v. Monreal (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 670 and People v. Mobley (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 761 were disapproved to the extent they are contrary to the opinion.