In People v. Brown (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 1335, counsel made a motion to withdraw as counsel because the defendant had insisted on testifying perjuriously. The trial court denied the motion. In finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, the appellate court looked to the California Supreme Court case of People v. Lucky (1988) 45 Cal.3d 259 which determined that "a disagreement between defendant and his or her counsel regarding defendant's right to testify does not necessarily require the appointment of another attorney." ( People v. Brown, supra, 203 Cal.App.3d at p. 1340.) The appellate court concluded that "even where that disagreement is over the defendant's intent to commit perjury, in the absence of evidence that the disagreement has resulted in 'a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship of such magnitude as to jeopardize the defendant's right to effective assistance of counsel' citation, a trial court may still deny a motion for withdrawal in its discretion." ( Id. at p. 1341.)