Dominican judge rules Wander Franco criminally responsible, avoids prison

A Dominican judge found Wander Franco criminally responsible for the sexual and psychological abuse of a minor, then spared the Tampa Bay Rays shortstop from prison. The ruling exposed a stark accountability gap: the court held Franco liable, but said he would not serve a sentence because he was seen as both a defendant and a victim in the case.

Judge José Antonio Núñez issued the decision Monday in Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic, and cited extortion and blackmail tied to the minor’s mother. That mother had already been sentenced to 10 years in prison for sexually trafficking her daughter. Franco had faced allegations that he carried on a four-month sexual relationship with a girl who was 14 at the time and gave the girl’s mother money and a car in exchange for consent.

The case has become one of the most closely watched legal sagas involving an MLB player in recent years because it sits at the intersection of criminal law, youth protection and institutional oversight. Franco was first placed on administrative leave in August 2023 as Major League Baseball investigated social media allegations that he had an inappropriate relationship with a minor. He remained on MLB’s restricted list as the league said it would conclude its investigation at the appropriate time.

The Dominican proceedings have moved in stages. In June 2025, Franco was found guilty of sexual abuse of a minor and received a suspended two-year prison sentence. That ruling was appealed, leading to the retrial that ended with Monday’s judgment. Full sentencing details were expected June 16, 2026, leaving open how Dominican authorities will formalize the punishment, and whether Franco can return to Major League Baseball at all.

For MLB and the Rays, the public stakes are bigger than one roster decision. Leagues that say they prioritize player conduct and the protection of minors owe fans, families and local communities clear standards, timely discipline and transparent explanations when those standards are tested. Franco’s case shows how criminal findings, suspended punishment and league investigations can drift apart, leaving the public to decide whether the system actually protected the child at the center of it.