In what circumstances would the jury have found a defendant guilty of two counts of perverting the course of justice for failing to testify?

Here, even if defendant was denied the right to testify, any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury heard testimony from nine current or former police officers, detailing defendant's involvement in two different undercover investigations of prostitution. In light of their testimony, the audio recordings of the undercover operations, and the evidence of condoms, lubricant, cash, and client sheets found in defendant's vehicle and residence, the outcome would have been no different had defendant testified. Defense counsel tried to discredit the prosecution's evidence but the jury deliberated for less than two and a half hours before returning guilty verdicts on both counts. Accordingly, any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. (See People v. Allen, supra, 44 Cal.4th at pp. 871-872.)