Court combined sentences of deprivation and restriction of liberty for recidivist offender S.O. due to lack of grounds for separate execution.

The court combined sentences of deprivation of liberty and restriction of liberty for the defendant S.O., who was found guilty of multiple thefts. The prosecution argued that S.O. showed a contemptuous attitude toward legal norms, resulting in his classification as a dangerous prisoner and a lack of remorse. The court agreed, ruling that only a combined sentence of deprivation of liberty could achieve the educational goals of punishment given the absence of mitigating circumstances.