A Puerto Rico court has reversed a decision by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR) to classify inmate Verónica Sastre Robles at a maximum custody level. The ruling, issued by the Court of Appeals of Puerto Rico on July 31, 2026, affects Sastre Robles, who argued that her classification was based on unproven allegations. This decision is significant as it highlights the legal standards that govern inmate classification and the importance of due process in administrative decisions.
Verónica Sastre Robles entered the correctional system on January 10, 2022, to serve sentences for offenses related to Puerto Rico's Weapons Law. Initially classified at a medium custody level, she was later moved to maximum custody in May 2023. However, her status changed multiple times, and by December 2024, she was classified as minimum custody after completing various educational and vocational programs.
In 2025, the DCR received several negative reports regarding Sastre Robles' behavior, including a disciplinary complaint filed against her for alleged disturbances and disobedience. However, this complaint was dismissed in January 2026, and she was declared not guilty. Despite this, the DCR reviewed her custody level in May 2026 and decided to classify her as maximum custody, citing her behavior as a risk to institutional security.
The dispute escalated when Sastre Robles filed an Administrative Review Request on June 22, 2026, challenging the DCR's decision. She argued that the DCR had erred by using dismissed disciplinary incidents to justify her maximum custody classification. She claimed that the classification was arbitrary and lacked a factual basis since the incidents cited were not proven.
In its ruling, the court found that the DCR had acted prematurely in reclassifying Sastre Robles without sufficient justification. The court noted that the DCR failed to provide evidence of a pattern of negative behavior that would warrant a non-routine review of her custody level. The court stated, “The determination must rest on documented evidence that demonstrates behavior contrary to institutional norms and security, not merely on unadjudicated allegations.”
The panel of judges, led by Judge Lotti Rodríguez, emphasized that the DCR's discretion to modify custody levels must be grounded in substantial evidence and must adhere to established procedures. The court concluded that the DCR had not met the necessary standards for a non-routine review and thus revoked the decision to classify Sastre Robles at a maximum custody level.
This ruling is significant for several reasons. It reinforces the legal principle that administrative decisions, especially those affecting an individual's liberty, must be based on solid evidence and due process. The court's decision ensures that inmates are not unfairly penalized based on unproven allegations, which could have serious implications for their rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
Moving forward, this ruling may impact how the DCR handles custody classifications and disciplinary actions against inmates. It sets a precedent that emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability in administrative decisions within correctional facilities. This case also highlights the importance of adhering to established protocols when evaluating an inmate's behavior and custody needs.
In terms of next steps, the DCR may seek to appeal the court's decision, although the opinion does not specify if such an appeal is forthcoming. The ruling also leaves open the possibility for future evaluations of Sastre Robles' custody level, contingent on documented evidence of her behavior that aligns with the criteria for a non-routine review.