Carr

Daniel Carr appeals Ms conviction for burning a cross on another person’s property without authorization. (Pen. Code, § 11411, subd. (c).) Carr contends the court and prosecutor impermissibly undermined Ms efforts to show the cross burning was authorized. He also faults the court for disallowing his intoxication defense. We find no merit in Carr’s intoxication defense, and even less—and that is exactly what we mean—in Ms argument that one person can “authorize” victimization of another.

David Shostak is Jewish. On the night of May 19, 1998, he was at his Huntington Beach home with Ms wife, Barbara, their 15-year-old son Jarod, and another son. David was just about to turn in when he noticed flames in Ms yard. When he looked outside, he saw a seven-foot cross burning on the side of Ms house. He sprinted to the cross, knocked it to the ground and extinguished the flames with Ms garden hose. Barbara, meanwhile, called 911.

David testified he was very upset when he saw the cross, and Barbara said her reaction was shock, horror and disdain. She said the cross burning was hateful and unlike anytMng she had ever experienced.

An investigation into the matter led the police…