Breard v. Greene

Background

Angel Francisco Breard, a Paraguayan citizen, was convicted in Virginia of rape and capital murder and sentenced to death after a 1993 trial. Years later he raised for the first time a claim under the Vienna Convention that police failed to tell him he could contact his consulate. Paraguay also sued U.S. officials and brought a related complaint in the International Court of Justice. The ICJ asked the United States to take measures to prevent Breard’s execution pending its decision. Breard and Paraguay asked this Court for stays and other relief the day of the scheduled execution.

Reasoning

The Court refused to halt the execution and denied the petitions and related requests for relief. It held that Breard procedurally defaulted the Vienna Convention claim by not raising it earlier, that federal habeas rules (including AEDPA) limit late factual development, and that Breard did not show a causal effect of the alleged violation on his trial. The Court also concluded that Paraguay lacks a clear private right to set aside the conviction in U.S. courts, that Eleventh Amendment immunity blocks Paraguay’s suit against the State, and that §1983 relief is not available to Paraguay in this context. A concurring justice agreed with the denial.

Real world impact

The decision makes it harder for a foreign national to reopen a final conviction on a late-raised consular-notification claim. It also shows that provisional requests from international tribunals do not automatically stop state executions in U.S. courts. Foreign states face significant limits suing U.S. states over consular-notification failures.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices Stevens, Ginsburg, and Breyer dissented, arguing the international issues and novelty of the claims warranted a stay and fuller briefing before allowing an execution to proceed.