People v. Cesena CA2/6

Filed 3/16/26 P. v. Cesena CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B343733 (Super. Ct. No. 24F-00363) Plaintiff and Respondent, (San Luis Obispo County)

v.

JANINE LAURICE CESENA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Janine Laurice Cesena appeals a judgment after a jury convicted her of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1), count 1) and found true that she inflicted great bodily injury (id., at § 12022.7, subd. (a)). The trial court sentenced Cesena to five years in state prison, comprised of the low term of two years on count 1 and three years for the great bodily injury enhancement. Cesena had accused the victim, N.B., of taking her girlfriend to a casino. N.B. denied it and then Cesena hit him in the “kidney area” and head with a baseball bat. N.B. testified, “I was bleeding. I had blood pouring out of my ear and my hand

was full of blood.” He did not lose consciousness but felt dizzy. N.B. was later hospitalized, lost hearing in his left ear, and gets headaches. We appointed counsel to represent Cesena. Counsel examined the record and filed an opening brief requesting the court independently review the entire record on appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). On November 13, 2025, we sent a notice to the address on file for Cesena advising she had 30 days to submit any grounds for appeal, contentions, or arguments she wished us to consider. We have received no such submission from Cesena. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Cesena’s counsel has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 443.) The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.