What is the test to determine whether a court abused its discretion in imposing a restitution fine?

Because defense counsel requested imposition of the very amount ordered, which was at the low end of possible restitution fines, we cannot find that the court abused its discretion. Perhaps to overcome this obstacle, defendant frames the issue as one of constitutional dimension, in arguing that the amount imposed violates ex post facto principles. "[T]he imposition of restitution fines constitutes punishment, and therefore is subject to the proscriptions of the ex post facto clause and other constitutional provisions.

Page 9

[Citations.]" (People v. Souza (2012) 54 Cal.4th 90, 143; see also, People v. Morris (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 94, 102.)

The ex post facto "clause prohibits three legislative categories: legislation '"(1) which punishes as a crime an act previously committed, which was innocent when done; (2) which makes more burdensome the punishment for a crime, after its commission, or (3) which deprives one charged with crime of any defense available according to law at the time when the act was committed.'" [Citations.]" (People v. McVickers (1992) 4 Cal.4th 81, 84.)