Abstract
Presently, different judicial divisions of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court offer varying legal conclusions concerning the possibility to classify the actions of a person when sentencing based on the criterion of classification “repeated” varies. This conclusion follows from the analysis of the judicial Decree as of December 11, 2019 (Proceeding No. 51-4204 км 19, Сase No. 274/2956/17) of the Third judicial division of the Criminal Cassation Court, the Decree of the First judicial division of the Cassation Criminal Court as of July 10, 2018 (Proceeding No. 51-2475 км 18, Case No. 545/3663/16-к), and of the Decree as of February 27, 2019 (Proceeding No. 51-5205 км 18, Case No. 695/136/17) of the Second judicial division of the Criminal Cassation Court.Due to such a state of affairs, the already amalgamated division of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court was making its own decision in Case No. 591/4366/18 (Proceeding No. 51-1122 кмо 20) on September 14, 2020. Yet, my opinion is that not all arguments and statements of facts provided in this decree can be agreed on without questions.In the process of the research, it was proved that the situation of the judge’s practicing their discretion powers concerning merging criminal proceedings into one proceeding (according to the requirements of Article 334 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine) is the only exceptional situation that provides for, in absence of the court’s guilty verdict in “the first criminal proceeding,” which for the legal classification of the repeated offence must take a legal effect, using the criterion of classifying the actions of the accused as “repeated” in the “next criminal proceeding.” Otherwise, we should be discussing violation of the constitutional foundation of presumption of innocence in the criminal proceeding and a securing proof of guilt.