People v. Hudy

Chief Judge Wachtler

(dissenting). I dissent and vote to affirm because, in my view, there was no legal error in the trial court’s evidentiary rulings requiring a new trial.

I agree with the majority that application of the 1984 *67amendment to Penal Law § 130.16 to this case does not violate the constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws (US Const, art I, § 10). An ex post facto law is one "which punishes as a crime an act previously committed, which was innocent when done; which makes more burdensome the punishment for a crime, after its commission, or which deprives one charged with crime…