Calder v. Bull

In Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386, 1 L. Ed. 648 (1798), the Supreme Court described four general categories of ex post facto laws. "1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law; and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender." ( Id., at p. 390.) The Court explained at page 390 that the constitutional ban against ex post facto laws prohibits four general categories of laws: (1) a law that makes criminal an action that was not criminal when done; (2) a law that aggravates a crime or makes it greater than it was when it was committed; (3) a law that increases the punishment for a crime after it was committed; (4) a law that alters the legal rules of evidence and requires less or different evidence to convict the offender of a crime than the law required at the time the crime was committed. (Although Calder examined the ex post facto clause of the federal Constitution, the ex post facto clause in the California Constitution is analyzed in the same manner as its federal counterpart.)