Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Application of Carlton WALKER, et al., Petitioners-Appellants, For a Judgment, etc., v. George E. PATAKI, as Governor of the State of New York, et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered November 6, 1998, which, in a proceeding seeking declaratory, injunctive and mandamus relief based upon an alleged violation of petitioners prisoners' right under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, as foreign nationals, to be advised upon arrest of their right to contact a representative of their country, granted respondents' motions to dismiss the petition for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The operative allegation of the petition is that the police “continue to arrest and detain other foreign nationals” in violation of article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (21 UST 77, TIAS No. 6821), which provides for notification of a foreign national's consulate upon the arrest of that foreign national. The petition should be dismissed for lack of a justiciable controversy. Mandamus directing respondents to enforce the treaty and an injunction prohibiting respondents from continuing their alleged illegal practices cannot be granted where petitioners do not appear to seek any form of post-conviction relief for themselves. Even if they were, the treaty does not require that such be entertained outside the context of the Criminal Procedure Law (cf., Breard v. Greene, 523 U.S. 371, 118 S.Ct. 1352, 140 L.Ed.2d 529). We note that respondents do not dispute that foreign nationals are entitled to the notice petitioners claim; the absence of a dispute also makes declaratory relief unavailable (see, Goodman & Co. v. New York Tel. Co., 309 N.Y. 258, 266, 128 N.E.2d 406).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: November 09, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)