Breard v. Greene
Encyclopedia
Breard v. Greene, , is a United States Supreme Court
decision decided on April 14, 1998 which placed the United States
directly in conflict with the International Court of Justice
and has since been used as precedent.
, was convicted of the attempted rape and capital murder of Ruth Dickie. Breard was scheduled to be executed by the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1996. Ultimately, Breard filed a motion for habeas relief in Federal District Court, alleging that arresting authorities violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
when they failed to inform him that, as a foreign national, he had the right to contact the Paraguayan Consulate. The court concluded that Breard had procedurally defaulted on this claim by failing to raise it in state court. The Court of Appeals affirmed. In 1996, Paraguayan officials brought suit alleging that Virginia officials had violated their rights under the Vienna Convention by failing to inform Breard of his treaty rights and the Paraguayan consulate of Breard's situation. Ultimately, the District Court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
The case is also notable, as a precedent, because it is one of the most recent affirmations at the U.S. Supreme Court level of the continued validity of the long standing U.S. constitutional law principle that a duly Senate ratified treaty may be overridden by a later domestic statute enacted by mere majorities in each house of Congress. Most countries do not permit treaties to be amended by domestic laws, and instead hold them to be superior to all legal enactments except the provisions of the national constitution in effect when the treaty was adopted.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
decision decided on April 14, 1998 which placed the United States
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
directly in conflict with the International Court of Justice
International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice is the primary judicial organ of the United Nations. It is based in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands...
and has since been used as precedent.
Background
In 1992, Angel Francisco Breard, a citizen of ParaguayParaguay
Paraguay , officially the Republic of Paraguay , is a landlocked country in South America. It is bordered by Argentina to the south and southwest, Brazil to the east and northeast, and Bolivia to the northwest. Paraguay lies on both banks of the Paraguay River, which runs through the center of the...
, was convicted of the attempted rape and capital murder of Ruth Dickie. Breard was scheduled to be executed by the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1996. Ultimately, Breard filed a motion for habeas relief in Federal District Court, alleging that arresting authorities violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963 is an international treaty that defines a framework for consular relations between independent countries...
when they failed to inform him that, as a foreign national, he had the right to contact the Paraguayan Consulate. The court concluded that Breard had procedurally defaulted on this claim by failing to raise it in state court. The Court of Appeals affirmed. In 1996, Paraguayan officials brought suit alleging that Virginia officials had violated their rights under the Vienna Convention by failing to inform Breard of his treaty rights and the Paraguayan consulate of Breard's situation. Ultimately, the District Court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Question Presented
May Angel Francisco Breard, a Paraguayan citizen, and various Paraguayan diplomats receive a stay of execution and other relief, respectively, for the capital murder of Ruth Dickie under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations?Decision
No. In a per curiam opinion, the Court denied the stay applications and all other relief. The majority of the Court concluded that, because he had procedurally defaulted it, Breard could not raise his Vienna Convention claim on federal habeas corpus review. Moreover, the Court reasoned that Breard could not have demonstrated that the alleged violation of the Vienna Convention had an effect on his state trial that ought to have resulted in the overturning of his conviction. Additionally, the Court found that the Vienna Convention did not clearly provide a foreign nation with a private right of action in U.S. courts. Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G. Breyer, in separate dissents, argued that the Court ought to have granted the stay applications and considered the merits of the case to different degrees.The case is also notable, as a precedent, because it is one of the most recent affirmations at the U.S. Supreme Court level of the continued validity of the long standing U.S. constitutional law principle that a duly Senate ratified treaty may be overridden by a later domestic statute enacted by mere majorities in each house of Congress. Most countries do not permit treaties to be amended by domestic laws, and instead hold them to be superior to all legal enactments except the provisions of the national constitution in effect when the treaty was adopted.
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 523
- List of United States Supreme Court cases
- Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
- Medellin v. TexasMedellín v. TexasMedellín v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 is a United States Supreme Court decision which held that while an international treaty may constitute an international commitment, it is not binding domestic law unless Congress has enacted statutes implementing it or unless the treaty itself is "self-executing";...
- Sanchez-Llamas v. OregonSanchez-Llamas v. OregonSanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 548 U.S. 331 , was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court which held that a state court did not have to exclude evidence admitted into court in violation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention.- Facts :...