The Puerto Rico Court of Appeals recently ruled against two requests for protection orders in a domestic violence case involving William Gabriel Carrión Roque and Gretchen María Capó Hernández. The court's decision, issued on June 29, 2026, has significant implications for both parties and highlights the complexities surrounding domestic violence cases in Puerto Rico.
In this case, both parties sought protection orders under Law 54, which is designed to prevent and intervene in domestic violence situations. The court's ruling means that neither party will receive the protection they sought, which could leave them vulnerable in the aftermath of their tumultuous relationship.
Background
The case began when William Gabriel Carrión Roque filed a petition for a protection order against Gretchen María Capó Hernández on January 8, 2026. He claimed that he had separated from Hernández several months prior and alleged that she had been harassing him, even placing a GPS tracking device on his vehicle. Carrión Roque expressed concerns for his safety, stating that Hernández had been excessively calling and texting him.
In response, on January 21, 2026, Hernández filed her own petition for a protection order against Carrión Roque, alleging psychological abuse and inappropriate behavior in front of their children. The court consolidated the two cases, leading to a hearing on February 3, 2026, where both parties presented their testimonies.
The Ruling
After reviewing the evidence, the court ruled on February 3, 2026, that neither party had sufficiently proven their claims of domestic violence. The court stated, "the evidence presented did not meet the necessary elements to establish domestic violence as defined by Law 54." The ruling was issued by Judge Barresi Ramos, with the panel including Judges Rodríguez Casillas and Santiago Calderón.
Both Carrión Roque and Hernández were dissatisfied with the ruling and subsequently filed for certiorari, seeking a review of the decision. The appeals court ultimately upheld the lower court's ruling, emphasizing that the evidence did not substantiate the claims of abuse made by either party.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for both parties, as it denies them the legal protections they sought under Law 54. The decision may also affect their custody arrangements for their two children, aged four and eight, as the court's findings could influence future custody disputes. The ruling underscores the challenges faced by individuals seeking protection from domestic violence, particularly when both parties claim victimhood.
Furthermore, this case highlights the necessity for clear evidence in domestic violence cases. The court's decision indicates that without substantial proof, claims of abuse may not be sufficient to warrant protection orders. This precedent may influence future cases involving similar circumstances, as courts will likely require more concrete evidence to grant protection orders.
What's Next
While the court has ruled on this matter, it remains to be seen if either party will appeal the decision to a higher court. Additionally, there may be ongoing custody disputes related to the children, as both parties continue to navigate the aftermath of their separation.