P.

DISCUSSION

Appellant contends his sentence of 25 years to life on counts 2 and 3 under the One Strike law violates the ex post facto clauses of the United States and California Constitutions because it imposed a greater punishment for his offense than was authorized by law when the offenses were committed. He requests that this court vacate his sentence and remand the matter for resentencing. The One Strike law (§ 667.61) originally went into effect on November 30, 1994. (People v. Alvarez (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 1170, 1178 (Alvarez).) The indeterminate life terms prescribed by section 667.61 “greatly exceed the determinate sentences previously available for violations of section 288 [and other sexual offenses.]” (People v. Hiscox (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 253, 257 (Hiscox).) “Both the California and United States Constitutions proscribe ex post facto laws. (U.S. Const., art. I, § 10; Cal. Const., art. I, § 9.) The federal and state prohibitions against ex post facto laws apply to any statute that punishes as a crime an act previously committed which was not a crime when done or that inflicts greater punishment than the applicable law when the crime was committed. [Citation.]”…