C.F.R. » Title 32 » CHAPTER VI—DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY › SUBCHAPTER G—MISCELLANEOUS RULES › PART 770—RULES LIMITING PUBLIC ACCESS TO PARTICULAR INSTALLATIONS › Subpart D—Entry Regulations for Naval Installations and Property in Puerto Rico

32 C.F.R. § 770.38

Entry restrictions

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Except for duly authorized military personnel and civilian employees, including contract employees, of the United States in the performance of their official duties, entry upon any U.S. Navy installation or property in Puerto Rico at anytime, by any person for any purpose whatsoever without the advance consent of the Commanding Officer of the installation or property concerned, or an authorized representative of that Commanding Officer, is prohibited.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 2000–2001 · leading case: United States v. Acevedo-Delgado, 167 F. Supp. 2d 477 (D.P.R. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Acevedo-Delgado, 167 F. Supp. 2d 477 (D.P.R. 2001). · cites it 5× “The Court in this case finds that Section 1382 and 32 C.F.R. § 770.38 do not place a “substantial burden” on Reverend Aceve *481 do-Delgado’s ability to worship or engage in religious activity.”
United States v. Maxwell-Anthony, 254 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2001). “lawful regulation” is the one set out in 32 C.F.R. § 770.38 , namely, “entry' ... for any purpose whatsoever without the advance consent of the Commanding Officer.”
United States v. McGrath-Andino, 143 F. Supp. 2d 184 (D.P.R. 2001). · cites it 3× “§ 1382 and 32 C.F.R. § 770.38 . See United States v.”
United States v. Maxwell-Anthony, 129 F. Supp. 2d 101 (D.P.R. 2000). · cites it 3× “§ 1382 , 1 which prohibits, among other things, unlawful entry onto Naval property for any purpose prohibited by regulation, in this case 32 C.F.R. § 770.38 (2000). 2 Defendant moves for a court order permitting the introduction of expert testimony regarding an individual’s…”
United States v. Sued-Jiménez, 275 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2001). “See 32 C.F.R. §§ 770.38 , 770.40. Appellants received various sentences for this Class B misdemeanor.”
United States v. Sued-Jimenez (1st Cir. 2001). “See 32 C.F.R. §§ 770.38 , 770.40. Appellants received various sentences for this Class B misdemeanor.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.