context: It must therefore be determined whether a reasonable officer could have believed that the circumstances established the necessary probable cause for Roe's arrest.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.identifier: 821 F.2d 913, 921
citation_a.parenthetical: qualified immunity is warranted if officers of reasonable competence could disagree on whether the probable cause test was met
citation_a.sentence: Robison v. Via, 821 F.2d 913, 921 (2d Cir.1987) (qualified immunity is warranted if officers of reasonable competence could disagree on whether the probable cause test was met); see Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 (“The relevant, disposi-tive inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful ... ”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 533 U.S. 202, 202
citation_b.parenthetical: "The relevant, disposi-tive inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful ... "
citation_b.sentence: Robison v. Via, 821 F.2d 913, 921 (2d Cir.1987) (qualified immunity is warranted if officers of reasonable competence could disagree on whether the probable cause test was met); see Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202, 121 S.Ct. 2151 (“The relevant, disposi-tive inquiry in determining whether a right is clearly established is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful ... ”).