Weaver v. Graham

Holding that for a criminal law to be ex post facto, it must disadvantage the offender affected by it

Lynce v. Mathis

Holding the cancellation of early release credits violated the Ex Post Facto Clause

Schifando v. City of Los Angeles

Denying request where the materials sought to be judicially noticed were not particularly supportive of the respondent's cause or relevant to the action and noting that "[n]o party has alleged" what the amicus curiae had purported to respond to

In re Estrada

Holding that a defendant "is entitled to the ameliorating benefits of the statutes as amended" if "the amendatory statute lessening punishment becomes effective prior to the date the judgment of conviction becomes final"

People v. Alford

Holding that the fee under former §1465.8 was not a punitive fine subject to ex post facto restrictions, and that the trial court properly imposed the fee in effect after the defendant committed his crime

McGinnis v. Royster

Holding that there is a "legitimate desire of the state legislature to afford state prison officials an adequate opportunity to evaluate both an inmate's conduct and his rehabilitative progress before he is eligible for parole"

People v. Buckhalter

Concluding that where, as here, a defendant is resentenced, the sentencing court must calculate the actual time the defendant has already served and credit that time against the modified sentence; that "a convicted felon once sentenced, committed, and delivered to prison is not restored to presentence status, for purposes of the sentence-credit statutes, by virtue of a limited appellate remand for correction of sentencing errors"; and therefore, that the defendant "cannot earn good behavior credits under the formula specifically applicable to persons detained in a local facility, or under equivalent circumstances elsewhere, 'prior to the imposition of sentence' for a felony"

People v. Nasalga

Holding Estrada rule inapplicable to statutes with an express saving clause or its equivalent

People v. Floyd

Finding no equal protection violation in the expressly prospective application of Proposition 36 providing for mandatory probation for some convicted of nonviolent drug possession offenses

Evangelatos v. Superior Court

Holding that a measure, which modified the traditional, common law joint and several liability doctrine, did not apply to claims for relief that had accrued before the effective date of the new law

Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice