Practice question
A statute reallocates pending criminal cases to another competent court while preserving the offense, punishment, burden of proof and all substantive defenses. The accused claims that changing the forum alone is necessarily ex post facto. Which is best?
- Every forum change necessarily increases punishment
- The change is not automatically ex post facto merely because it affects pending cases; its substantive effects must be examined
- Any law called procedural may abolish innocence
- The new court may create a higher penalty to justify the transfer
- The accused chooses the forum by personal preference
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html — Constitution, Article III section 22: prohibition of ex post facto laws.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1999/jan1999/gr_128096_1999.html — Lacson v. Executive Secretary, G.R. 128096, January 20, 1999, main decision: ex post facto categories and procedural jurisdiction distinguished from prohibited penal retroactivity.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1930/act_3815_1930.html — Revised Penal Code Articles21–22: prior penalty law and favorable retroactivity, subject to the habitual-criminal limitation.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.