Right to Consular Assistance After Arrest In a Foreign Country

"The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations grants a foreign national who has been arrested, imprisoned or taken into custody a right to contact his consulate and requires the arresting government authorities to inform the individual of this right 'without delay.'" Rocha v. State, 16 S.W.3d 1, 13, 2000 WL 368923 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (citing Maldonado v. State, 998 S.W.2d 239, 246-47 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (citing Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, April 24, 1963, art. 36(1)(b), 21 U.S.T. 77, 100-101, 595 U.N.T.S. 261, 292 (ratified by the United States on Nov. 24, 1969))). The question of whether the Vienna Convention confers on a foreign national an individual "right to consular assistance following arrest" has not been settled. See Flores v. Johnson, 210 F.3d 456, 2000 WL 426212 (5th Cir. 2000); see also Rocha v. State, 16 S.W.3d at 25, 2000 WL 368923 ; Maldonado v. State, 998 S.W.2d at 247; United States v. Lombera-Camorlinga, 206 F.3d 882, 884 (9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Li, 206 F.3d 56, 62 (1st Cir. 2000). However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled the exclusionary rule of TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN art. 38.23(a) does not apply to violations of treaties. Rocha v. State, 16 S.W.3d at 19, 2000 WL 368923. Accordingly, suppression of evidence is not an available remedy for violation of the Vienna Convention. Id.; see also Lombera-Camorlinga, 206 F.3d at 883-84 (holding suppression is not a remedy for violation of Vienna Convention under federal law); Li, 206 F.3d at 66 (denying suppression of evidence as remedy for violation of treaty).