California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Chavez, F066359 (Cal. App. 2014):
"A restitution fine qualifies as punishment for purposes of the prohibition against ex post facto laws. [Citations.]" (People v. Saelee (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 27, 30-31.)
Page 22
Defendant did not object to the court's imposition of the restitution fine or raise his ex post facto argument below. The rule of forfeiture is applicable to ex post facto claims, particularly where the alleged error could easily have been corrected if the issue had been raised at the sentencing hearing. (People v. White (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 914, 917; People v. Turrin (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 1200, 1207.)
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.