California Supreme Court
In Re EJ
February 1, 2010223 P.3d 31
Summary
The court held that enforcing Proposition 83's 2,000-foot residency restriction against these parolees was prospective, not retroactive, because each petitioner was released on parole and took up noncompliant housing after the restriction became effective. It also held that the enforcement did not violate the federal or state ex post facto clauses because it regulated post-enactment conduct rather than increasing punishment for the underlying offenses. The court transferred the remaining as-applied constitutional challenges for evidentiary hearings in the appropriate trial courts.