1. the accused was convicted under bp 22 for having several checks which were dishonored by the drawee bank on their due date because the accused closed her account after the issuance of the checks. On appeal, she argued that she could not be convicted under bp 22 by reason of the closing of her account because said law applies solely to checks dishonored by reason of insufficiency of funds and that at the time she issued the checks concerned, she had adequate funds in the bank. Is her contention correct?

a. yes, the application thereof would be tantamount to an ex post facto law

b. yes, the application there of would be a violation of the right against double jeopardy

c. No, the proof beyond reasonable doubt was not established

d. No, the law punishes two acts and the act in case at bar falls under the second way of violating it