Does a statute retroactively increase the punishment for a crime committed after the crime has been committed violate the ex post facto clause?

"A statute violates the ex post facto clause[s] when, on its face or as applied, it retroactively ' "increase[s] the punishment for criminal acts." ' Thus[,] the prohibition on ex post facto laws prevents the government from changing the punishment for a criminal act after the act has been performed." (People v. Callejas (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 667, 670.) "[C]ourts have consistently held restitution fines qualify as 'punishment' for purposes of the ex post facto clause[s]." (Ibid.)