Legal Question in Constitutional Law in Idaho

Re: Ex post facto question

No.

Ex post facto doctrines don't apply to an offense committed after the law was actually changed.

What you have to pin down is what the law is at the time of the second offense.

It cannot retroactively convert a misdemeanor into a felony, but if all the statute requires is DUI, then your first offense is covered and there's no problem with the second one being considered a felony.

Re: Ex post facto question

You make an intriguing argument, but I don't believe it will work. Your potential new punishment is for the second DUI and not the first. At the time of your second offense the law already said you could face a felony conviction based on a prior DUI within the past ten years.

The ban on ex post facto laws is intended to prevent the government from creating or enhancing crimes or punishments retroactively and thereby exposing people to more punishment than they could have anticipated at the time of their act. At the time of your second DUI you could have enticipated the felony charge, so there seems to be no violation.

Here in California, the three-strickes law applies even where the strikes pre-date the law itself, and the law has not been overturned on ex post facto grounds for the same reasons I outlined above.