The following excerpt is from Bridge v. Ylst, 930 F.2d 26 (9th Cir. 1991):
Bridge argues that application of section 667 to his 1979 conviction violates the ex post facto clause of the United States Constitution. 5 A law violates the ex post facto clause only if it: 1) punishes as criminal an act which was innocent when committed; 2) makes a crime's punishment greater than when the crime was committed; or 3) deprives a person of a defense available at the time the crime was committed. Collins v. Youngblood, --- U.S. ----, 110 S.Ct. 2715, 2719, 111 L.Ed.2d 30 (1990).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.