March 29 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court justices expressed reluctance to grant broad new protections to foreign nationals who are charged with crimes without being told they had a right to get help from their consulate.

The justices today in Washington aimed a barrage of questions at lawyers for a Mexican man convicted of shooting at Oregon police officers and a Honduran convicted of a Virginia murder. They are seeking to set aside their convictions on the grounds that they weren't notified of their consular rights under the Vienna Convention.

Several justices said the two men might have waived any rights the treaty confers when their lawyers failed to demand consular access. Justices David Souter, Stephen Breyer and Anthony Kennedy all suggested that a new trial would be warranted only when a lawyer was so negligent as to deprive the defendant of the constitutional right to legal representation.

``If the accused talks to the attorney, his attorney is presumed to know the terms of the treaty,'' Kennedy said.

The high court fight affects potentially thousands of accused criminals. It comes two years after the International Court of Justice ruled that the U.S. violated the rights of 51 Mexicans on death row by not providing consular access.

The current case has drawn international attention, with 10 Latin American governments urging the Supreme Court to bolster the rights of foreign nationals accused of crimes. On the other side are the Bush administration and 30 states that say the court shouldn't impose new procedural requirements for law enforcement.

Roberts Questioning

Article 36 of the Vienna Convention requires government officials to immediately notify a detained foreign national of his right to seek assistance from his consulate. The United Nations adopted the treaty in 1963, and the U.S. Senate ratified it in 1969.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. questioned whether the treaty gave accused criminals any right to go to court with grievances. The ``norm'' is that ``treaties are between the sovereigns and don't confer rights on individuals,'' he said.

The Oregon case concerns Moises Sanchez-Llamas, who was arrested in 1999 after exchanging gunfire with police and wounding one officer in the leg. Sanchez-Llamas was convicted of 11 felony counts and sentenced to more than 20 years in prison.

Lawyers for Sanchez-Llamas, who speaks little English, say prosecutors should have been barred from using statements he made to police after his arrest.

Mexican Help

Justice Antonin Scalia said Sanchez-Llamas was seeking a remedy that wouldn't be available in other countries.

``I find it implausible that we signed a treaty that requires us to suppress evidence of this sort but allows other treaty partners to do whatever they like,'' Scalia said.

The convicted man's lawyer, Peter Gartlan, said the criminal trial might have come out differently had Sanchez-Llamas been able to enlist the help of Mexican officials.

``He wasn't given all the options he was supposed to be given,'' Gartlan said. ``We don't know what would have happened.''

Virginia Murder

The Virginia case involves Mario A. Bustillo, who was convicted of using a baseball bat to kill a man outside a fast- food restaurant in Springfield, Virginia, in 1997.

Bustillo contends that the Honduran consulate could have helped him show that a gang member called ``Sirena'' actually committed the crime. Bustillo says the consulate would have supplied assistance including evidence that Sirena flew back to Honduras the day after the murder. A jury convicted Bustillo and sentenced him to 30 years in prison.

Virginia officials fault Bustillo for not raising the Vienna Convention issue until after his conviction, as part of his so- called habeas corpus petition in state court. The judge who rejected that petition said Bustillo should have raised the issue earlier.

Bustillo's lawyer, Mark T. Stancil, told the justices that police officers should be responsible for telling foreign nationals of their rights and shouldn't rely on defense lawyers to ``do the duty of the state.''

Not Rocket Science

That argument struck a chord with some justices. Kennedy and Souter both asked Oregon Solicitor General Mary H. Williams why police couldn't routinely advise foreign suspects of their consular rights, much as officers already do in telling suspects they have a right to a lawyer.

``It's not like rocket science,'' Kennedy said.

``You ask him what his name is,'' Souter added. ``Why don't you ask him what country he's from?''

Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Gregory Garre told the justices that the State Department has worked to ensure that state and local governments are complying with the treaty.

``The initial indications we have seen is that these efforts are working,'' he said.

The cases are Bustillo v. Johnson, 05-51, and Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 04-10566.

To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: March 29, 2006 13:56 EST