Probable and Reasonable Cause “Probable cause.” Reasonable cause; having more evidence for than against. A reasonable ground for belief in the existence of facts warranting the proceedings complained of. An apparent state of facts found to exist upon reasonable inquiry (that is, such inquiry as the given case renders convenient and proper), which would induce a reasonably intelligent and prudent man to believe, in a criminal case, that the accused person had committed the crime charged, or, in a civil case, that a cause of action existed. Cook v. Singer Sewing Machine Co., 138 Cal.App. 418, 32 P.2d 430, 431 Probable cause is the existence of circumstances which would lead a reasonably prudent man to believe in guilt of arrested party; mere suspicion or belief, unsupported by facts or circumstances, is insufficient. State v. Jones, 248 Or. 428, 435 P.2d 317, 319. Probable cause permits an officer to arrest one for a felony without a warrant. Probable cause justifying officer’s arrest without warrant has bee n defined as situation where officer has more evidence favoring suspicion that person is guilty of crime than evidence against such suspicion, but there is some room for doubt. Nugent v. Superior Court for San Mateo County, 254 C.A.2d 420, 62 Cal.Rptr. 217, 221 Probable cause exists when facts and circumstances within officer’s knowledge and of which he has reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient to warrant a man of reasonable caution in believing that offense has been or is being committed. State v. Kolb, N.D., 239 N.W. 2d 815, 817. Probable cause for search and seizure with or without search warrant involves probabilities which are not technical but factual and practical considerations of every day life upon which reasonable and prudent men act, and essence of probable cause is reasonable ground for belief in guilt. Paula v. State, Fla.App., 188 So.2d 388, 390 The finding of probable cause for issuance of an arrest warrant (as required by 4th Amend.) may be based upon hearsay evidence in whole or part. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 4(b)

Arrest, search and seizure. Reasonable grounds for belief that a person should be arrested or searched. Probable cause exists where the facts and circumstances would warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense was or is being committed. Com v. stewart, 358 Mass. 747, 267 N.E.2d 213 False imprisonment action. For arrest which must be shown as justification by defendants in action for false imprisonment is reasonable grounds of suspicion supported by circumstances sufficient in themselves to warrant cautious man in believing accused to be guilty, but does not depend on actual state of case in point of fact, as it may turn out upon legal investigation, but on knowledge of facts which would be sufficient to induce reasonable belief in truth of accusation. Christ v. McDonald, 152 Or. 494, 52 P.2d 655, 658 Founded suspicion must exist at the time the officer initiates the stop. U.S. v. Thomas, 863 F.2d 622, 625 Founded suspicion exists when the officer is aware of specific articulable facts that, together with rational inferences drawn from them, reasonable warrant a suspicion that the person to be detained has committed or is about to commit a crime. U.S. v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411, 416; U.S. v. Robert L., 874 F.2d 701, 703 In evaluating whether founded suspicion exists, the totality of circumstances shall be considered. U.S. v. Hernandez-Alvarado, 891 F.2d 144 There is no difference between the meaning of “reasonable cause”, which is the term that appears in the California statutes (Pen. Code, § 836, Veh. Code, § 40600), and the term “probable cause” as used in the Federal Fourth Amendment law. The two terms are identical. Memro (1995) 11 Cal.4th 786, 843; Puryear (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1188, 1195 “Probable cause” is synonymous with “reasonable cause.” United States v. Keown, D.C.Ky., 19 F.Supp. 639, 645, 646 Court must give this Amendment (4th) a practical interpretation and follow common sense standards for establishing probable cause. U.S. v. Brimley, Fla. (1976) 529 F.2d 103

The common law is a valuable guide in interpretation of the probable cause requirement of this Amendment (4th). Gerstein v. Pugh, Fla. (1975) 95 S.Ct. 854 Probable cause does not require certain, positive information, or even enough information to convict someone. Rather, “[t]he standard of probable cause to arrest is the probability of criminal activity, not a prima facie showing. Charles C. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 420, 423; Lewis (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 599, 608 In cases of municipal seizure for the breach of revenue, navigation and other laws, if the property seized is not condemned, the party seizing is exempted from liability for such seizure if the court before which the cause is tried grants a certificate that there was probable cause for the seizure. If the seizure was without probable cause, the party injured has his remedy at common law. The Apollon, 9 Wheat. (U.S.) 362, 6 L.Ed. 111; Taylor v. U.S., 3 How. (U.S.) 197, 11 L.Ed 559; Buckley v. U.S., 4 How. (u.S.) 251, 11 L.Ed 961; Jecker v. Montgomery, 13 How. (U.S.) 498, 14 L.Ed 240 “Probable cause.” A reasonable ground of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious man in the belief that a person accused is guilty of the offence with which he is charged. Carl v. Ayers, 53 N.Y. 17; Fugate v. Millar, 109 Mo. 281, 19 S.W. 71; Clement v. Major, 1 Colo.App. 297, 29 Pac. 19 “Probable cause” is such state of facts as would lead a man of ordinary care and prudence to believe, or entertain an honest and strong suspicion that the person is guilty of a crime. People v. Kilvington, 104 Cal. 86, 92 (1984); People v. Superior Court (Wells), 27 Cal.3d 670 (1980); People v. DeVaughn, 18 Cal.3d 889, 895 (1977) Probable cause exists if “the totality of facts based on reasonably trustworthy information would justify a prudent person in believing the individual arrested had committed…an offense” at the time of the arrest. Hannah, 795 F.2d 1389 (quoting United States v. Wallraff, 705 F.2d 980, 990 (8th Cir. 1983) [T]he probability, and not a prima facie showing, of criminal activity is the standard of probable cause. Hannah, 795 F.2d 1389 (quoting United States v. Wallraff, 705 F.2d 990 (8th Cir. 1983)

“Reasonable.” Fair, improper, just, moderate, suitable under the circumstances. Fit and appropriate to the end in view. Having the faculty of reason; rational; governed by reason; under the influence of reason; agreeable to reason. Thinking, speaking, or acting according to the dictates of reason. Not immoderate or excessive, being synonymous with rational, honest, equitable, fair, suitable, moderate, tolerable. Cass v. State, 124 Tex.Cr.R. 208, 61 S.W.2d 500 “Reasonable and probable cause.” Such grounds as justify any one in suspecting another of a crime, and placing him in custody thereon. It is a suspicion founded upon circumstances sufficiently strong to warrant reasonable man in belief that charge is true. Henry v. U.S., 361 U.S. 98, 80 S.Ct. 168, 4 l.Ed.2d 134; Com v. Stewart, 358 Mass. 747, 267 N.E. 2d 213 “Reasonable belief.” “Reasonable belief” or “probable cause” to make an arrest without a warrant exists when facts and circumstances within arresting officer’s knowledge, and if he had reasonable trustworthy information, are sufficient, in themselves to justify a man of average caution in belief that a felony has been or is being committed. State v. Johnson, 249 La. 950, 192 So. 2d 135, 141 “Reasonable cause.” As basis for arrest without warrant, is such state of facts as would lead man of ordinary care and prudence to believe and conscientiously entertain honest and strong suspicion that person sought to be arrested is guilty of crime. People v. Newell, 32 Colo.App. 273, 513 P.2d 1086, 1088 “Reasonable grounds.” Reasonable grounds within statute authorizing arrest without warrant by officer who has reasonable grounds for believing that person to be arrested has committed criminal offense means substantially probable cause. Beyer v. Young, 32 Colo.App. 273, 513 P.2d 1086, 1088. “Reasonable suspicion.” Reasonable suspicion which will justify officer in stopping defendant in public place is quantum of knowledge sufficient to induce ordinarily prudent and cautious man under circumstances to believe criminal activity is at hand. People v. Johnson, 56 A.D. 766, 392 N.Y.S.2d 294, 295

The reasonable person test “presupposes an innocent person.” Florida v. Bostick (1991) 501 U.S. 429, 438 “Information and belief.” A standard legal term which is used to indicate that the allegation is not based on the firsthand knowledge of the person making the allegation, but that person nevertheless, in good faith, believes the allegation to be true. See Probable Cause. B lack’s L a w Dic ti onar y , 5th ed., pg. 701 “Information and belief.” Refers to a degree of certainty which falls short of actual knowledge, but which comprehends reasonable, good faith efforts to determine truth or falsity. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 36 The term “information and belief” is used with reference to documents requiring verification, such as requests for search warrants, 122 P.2d 815, responses to interrogatories, complaints, pleadings, etc.; statements made “on information and belief” may or may not achieve the degree of certainty required for these various types of statements, depending on the jurisdiction, the circumstances, etc. B ar r on’s L a w Dic t ionar y , 4th ed., p. 249 “Probable cause.” A requisite element of a valid search and seizure or arrest, consisting of the existence of facts and circumstances within one’s knowledge and of which one has reasonably trustworthy information, sufficient in themselves to warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that crime has been committed [in the context of an arrest] or that property subject to seizure is at a designated location [in the context of a search and seizure]. 267 U.S. 132 The issue of whether probable cause to search exists must be determined on the basis of the independent judgment of a “detached magistrate”; it must be based on affidavits, in support of a request for a search warrant; or if the police officer conducts a warrantless search, the issue of probable cause may be later determined by a judge at a hearing if a motion is filed to suppress the evidence as illegally obtained. Probable cause can be established in many ways. It may be established on the basis of cumulative knowledge of the investigating officers. 380 U.S. 102, 111 Probable cause cannot be based on facts which are completely innocent in themselves. 393 U.S. 410

Furthermore, the fact that the suspect has been previously involved in similar crimes is not of important value. 393 U.S. 410. Probable cause must be based upon particular facts in the affidavit and not mere conclusions. 378 U.S. 108 Particularly difficult problems in determining probable cause arise when an informer’s tip standing alone does not create probable cause. It must be corroborated by the informer’s reliability or by the cumulative effect of other information and observations made by the police. 393 U.S. 410 A “totality of circumstances” test is applied. An affidavit must provide the magistrate with a “substantial basis” for determining the existence of probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant. 103 S.Ct. 2317 Probable cause is required at the time of the arrest or search, and may not be created by the fruits of the search or arrest. 287 U.S. 206 Observation of suspicion conduct may constitute probable cause for an arrest without a warrant. People v. Velasquez (1970) 3 Cal.App.3d 776, 83 Cal.Rptr. 916 “Reasonable grounds” for arrest under federal law is synonymous with “probable cause” in California law; for federal purposes the question of when an arrest takes place in California is governed by state law; and under both federal and California law, a search may precede an arrest as long as the search is supported by evidence sufficient to constitute probable cause apart from that discovered by the search. People v. Sanchez (1967) 256 Cal.App.2d 700, 64 Cal.Rptr. 331 Suspicion, even though reasonable, does not constitute probable cause to make an arrest. People v. McLean (1970) 6 Cal.App. 3d 300, 85 Cal.Rptr 683 More evidence is required in support of probable cause to make a lawful arrest without a warrant therefore than is required to justify the issuance of a search warrant. People v. Johnson (1970) 13 Cal.App.3d 742, 92 Cal.Rptr 105

Probable cause to arrest without a warrant represents an objective legal standard by which to measure the reasonableness and sufficiency of the arresting officer’s subjective belief that the defendant has committed an offense. Unless it is first established that the police officer believed that the crime had been committed by the defendant, the issue of probable cause does not arise. People v. Miller (1972) 7 Cal.3d 219, 101 Cal.Rptr 860, 496 P2d 1228 Cause for arrest exists when the facts known to arresting officer would lead a man of ordinary care and prudence to believe and conscientiously entertain an honest and strong suspicion that the person is guilty of a crime. People v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1980) 27 Cal.3d 670, 165 Cal.Rptr 872, 612 P2d 962 Mere suspicion is not enough; there must be circumstances represented to officers through testimony of their senses sufficient to justify them in goodfaith belief that defendant had violated law. Poldo v. United States (1932) 55 F.2d 866 If facts and circumstances before officer are such as to warrant man of prudence and caution in believing that offense has been committed, it is sufficient. Poldo v. United States (1932), 55 F2d 866 Where arresting officer have reasonable belief that defendant is committing felony, arrest and search are justified. People v. Gonzalez (1960) 186 Cal.App.2d 79, 8 Cal.Rptr 704 Probable cause to justify arrest without warrant must be tested on facts which where known to officers at time arrest was made. People v. Ruse (1964) 229 Cal.App.2d 759, 40 Cal.Rptr 619 Reasonable or probable cause to make arrest without a warrant is determined by factual situation presented or apparent to arresting officers when he is required to act. People v. Coleman (1965) 235 Cal.App.2d 612, 45 Cal.Rptr 542 Probable cause for an arrest without warrant depends on the measurement of probabilities, based on the unique facts of each case. Although the facts must incline the mind to believe, they may leave room for doubt. People v. Hillery (1967) 65 Cal.2d 795, 56 Cal.Rptr 280, 423 P2d 208

The question of probable cause to justify an arrest without a warrant must be tested by the facts that the record shows were known to the arresting officers when the arrest was made. People v. Talley (1967) 65 Cal.2d 830, 56 Cal.Rptr 492, 423 P2d 564 The significance to an arresting officer of what he observed, the factors he considered in forming his belief, his state of mind relative thereto, and his opinion formed thereon, are all elements relevant and necessary to the issue of probable cause in determining the justification for an arrest without warrant. People v. Duarte (1967) 254 Cal.App.2d 25, 61 Cal.Rptr 690 In determining whether there is reasonable cause for arrest without warrant, police officers are justified in taking into account past conduct, character and reputation of the person suspected. People v. Fuller (1969) 268 Cal.App.2d 844, 74 Cal.Rptr 488 The existence of probable cause to justify an arrest without a warrant must be tested by the facts which the record shows were known to the arresting officer at the time the arrest was made. People v. Hatcher (1968) 2 Cal.App.3d 71, 82 Cal.Rptr. 323 There is no exact formula for the determination of probable cause for an arrest; each case must be decided on its own facts and total atmosphere; but the facts must be viewed in the light of Fourth Amendment purposes. People v. Barrett (1969) 2 Cal.App.3d 142, 82 Cal.Rptr 424 There is probable cause for arrest when there is such a state of facts as would lead a man of ordinary care and prudence to believe, or entertain an honest and strong suspicion, that the person arrested is guilty of the offense charged. People v. Kilvington (1894) 104 Cal. 86, 37 P. 799 Probable cause is defined as a suspicion founded upon circumstances sufficiently strong to warrant a reasonable man in the belief the charge is true. Michel v. Smith (1922) 188 Cal.199, 205 P.113 Reasonable or probable cause is such state of facts as would lead man or ordinary care and prudence to believe, or entertain honest, string suspicion, that person in question is guilty of crime. People v. Woods (1956) 139 Cal.App.2d 515, 293 P2d 901

Good faith alone is not sufficient to justify arrest without warrant, but probable cause exists if facts and circumstances known to officer warrant a prudent man in believing that offense had been committed; law looks only at facts and circumstances presented to officer at time he is required to act, though it examines all these facts in determining probable cause. People v. Ingle (1960) 53 cal.2d 407, 2 Cal.Rptr 14, 348 P2d 577 General test of probable cause for arrest is one of reasonableness, factual question whether at time of arrest arresting officers had sufficient information to lead man of ordinary care and prudence to believe or entertain honest and strong suspicion that person in question was guilty of crime. People v. Gibson (1963) 220 Cal.App.2d 15, 33 Cal.Rptr 775 Circumstances short of probable cause for an arrest may justify temporary detention of a person by a peace officer for investigation and questioning where there is a rational suspicion by the peace officer that some activity out of the ordinary is or has taken place, and there is a connection between the person under suspicion and the unusual activity, and some suggestion that the activity is related to a crime. People v. Henze (1967) 253 Cal.App.2d 986, 61 Cal.Rptr 545 The Ninth Circuit uses the very same definition that is used for probable cause to search, namely: “probable cause [to arrest] exists when, under the totality of the circumstances known to the arresting officers, a prudent person would have concluded that there was a fair probability that [the defendant] had committed a crime.” Valencia Amezcua (9th Cir. 2002) 278 F.3d 901, 906, quoting from Garza (9th Cir. 1992) 980 F.2d 546, 550 [emphasis added] Probable cause to arrest requires more than the reasonable suspicion required for a detention. Campa (1984) 36 Cal.3d 870, 879 Probable cause to arrest (or search) is essentially the same as the probable cause which is required to obtain an arrest warrant or search warrant. Gorrostieta (1993) 19 Cal.App. 4th 71, 84 “Probable cause hearing.” That procedural step in the criminal process at which the judge or magistrate decides whether a complaint should issue or a person should be bound over to a grand jury on a showing of probable cause. See Preliminary hearing. B lac k’s L aw Dic t ionar y , 5th edition, pg. 1081

“Key Determinations of Probable Cause.” Judges find that determining probable cause is not always simple. “[T]he magistrate is required to make in effect two determinations: first he must satisfy himself that the facts are as the applicant states them to be, then he must consider whether these facts constitute probable cause for issuance of a warrant. People v. Cook (1978) 22 C3d 67, 84 n6, 148 CR 605 California Judges Bench Book, Search and Seizure (2nd edition), § 2.25, pg. 63 The Court found that “regardless of the police actions and methods, plaintiff had a reasonable expectation that the Fourth Amendment requires a judicial determination of probable cause before a neutral magistrate as a prerequisite to extended restraint on liberty following his unwarranted arrest.” Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 In essence, probable cause requires (1) facts (§§2.26-2.35) (2) making it fairly probable (§2.36) (3) that “contraband or evidence of a crime” (§2.37) (4) “will be found in a particular place (§§2.38-2.43). Illinois v. Gates (1983) 462 U.S. 213, 238, 103 S.Ct 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 California Judges Bench Book, Search and Seizure (2nd edition), § 2.25, pg. 63 “Bail and Probable Cause Hearing.” When the defendant is in custody pursuant to a warrantless arrest, the Fourth Amendment requires a relatively quick determination of probable cause; defendant must be released absent a warrant or probable cause to arrest. Gerstein v. Pugh (1975) 420 U.S. 103; In re Walters (1975) 15 C.3d 738, 742-743 Probable cause to arrest requires only a proper linkage between a suspect and a crime. California Judges Bench Book, Search and Seizure (2nd edition), § 4.24, “Probable cause,” pg. 241 Probable cause to arrest exists when the facts and circumstances known to the arresting officer at the time of the arrest justify a prudent person in believing that the suspect committed or was committing an offense. Hunter v. Bryant (1991) 502 U.S. 224, 228; Gerstein v. Pugh (1975) 420 U.S. 103, 111; People v. Souza (1994) 9 C4th 224, 230 Probable cause … exists when the totality of the circumstances or “total atmosphere” of the case would lead a person of ordinary care and prudence to entertain an honest and strong suspicion that the person to be arrested is

guilty of a crime. Price (1991) 1 Cal.App.4th 324, 410; Kraft (2000) 23 cal.App.4th 978, 1037; Charles C. (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 420, 423 “Probable cause cannot be established by an erroneous understanding of the law. While an officer may have reasonable suspicion or probable cause even where his reasonable understanding of the facts turns out to be mistaken, see, e.g., United States v. King, 244 F.3d 736 (9 th Cir. 2001), we have repeatedly held that a mistake about the law cannot justify a stop, let alone an arrest, under the Fourth Amendment. Beier v. City of Lewsiton (9th Cir. 2004), No. 02-35516 Probable cause to arrest requires the same level of suspicion as probable cause for a search warrant, i.e., a “fair probability” that the defendant is committing a crime or has committed one. Bailey v. Superior Court (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 1107, 1111 NOTE: A warrant cannot result for Vehicle Code violations, especially infractions (which are not punishable by imprisonment – Pen C § 19.6). The Vehicle Code is not criminal in nature, but civil. The Vehicle Code is a book of civil offenses that carry criminal sanctions. Only the Penal Code provides for the prosecution of a crime (Code of Civil Procedure § 31). Vehicle Code offenses are NOT crimes, but civil infractions. Probable cause requires a “strong” or “honest and strong” suspicion that the person arrested is guilty of a crime. In re Justin B. (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 879, 887; People v. Price (1991) 1 C4th 324 Law enforcement officers should not be the ones that engage in the sensitive balancing required to weight the merits of probable cause in a given case because they are not neutral parties to the determination of that crucial inquiry. U.S. v. Ricciardelli (1st Cir. 1993) 998 F.2d 8, 20 “Probable cause; declarations; warrants; issuance; certificate.” When a declaration of probable cause is made by a peace officer of this state, in accordance with subdivision (b) or (c), the magistrate, if, and only if, satisfied from the declaration that there exists probable cause that the offense described in the declaration has been committed and that the defendant described therein has committed the offense, shall issue a warrant of probable cause for the arrest of the defendant. California Penal Code § 817(a)(1)

The declaration in support of the warrant of probable cause for arrest shall be a sworn statement made in writing. California Penal Code § 817(b) “Probable cause” means something very different than “reasonable suspicion.” Ops. Atty Gen., from California Peace Officers Legal Sourcebook (2002), Search and Seizure – Persons. To make a valid arrest without a warrant, there must exist enough factual information to make an average, reasonable person … believe or strongly suspect that the individual is guilty of a crime. Hayes (9th Cir. 2001) 236 F.3d 891, 894; Barlow (9th Cir. 1991) 943 F.2d 1132; Hayes; Guajardo (1994) 23 cal.App.4th 1738, 1742; Gonzalez (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 1185; Rosales (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 759 If you understand this definition, you should be able to see (1) that probable cause to arrest requires more than the “reasonable suspicion” for a detention and (2) that probable cause to arrest (or search) is essentially the same as the “probable cause” which is required to obtain an arrest warrant or a search warrant. Campa (1984) 36 Cal.3d 870, 879; Gorrostieta (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 71, 84. California Peace Officers Legal Sourcebook (2002), “Search and Seizure – Persons,” Sec. 2.28, G., “Probable Cause.” Clearly no intelligent judge would issue an arrest or search warrant for Vehicle Code infractions, which are offenses not punishable by imprisonment in the first place, as per Penal Code § 19.6 Probable cause will be tested by the same “totality of the circumstances” standard used to test the adequacy of a search warrant affidavit. Valencia Amezcus (9th Cir. 2002) 278 F.3d 901, 906; Tarazon (9th Cir. 1993) 989 F.2d 1045, 1049; Rosales (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 759 For “reasonable suspicion,” both the quality and quantity of the information you need is considerably less than the “probable cause” you need to arrest or search. White (1990) 496 U.S. 325, 330; Bennett (1998) 17 Cal.App.4th 373 “[R]easonable suspicion is a less demanding standard than probable cause…” Wardlow (2000) 120 S.Ct. 673, 675-676

Probable cause is to be presented to a jury. Moore v. Comesanas (2nd Cir. 1994) 32 F.3d 670, 673 The issue of probable cause, which was predominantly factual in nature, was properly presented to the jury. Fassett v. Haeckel (2nd Cir. 1991) 936 F.2d 118, 120-21; Gramenos v. Jewel Co., Inc. (7th Cir, 1986) 797 F.2d 432, 438 The jury must decide the factual dispute as to what occurred between the parties that actually caused the arrest. Guffey v. Wyatt (10th Cir. 1994) 18 F.3d 869 Probable cause must be ESTABLISHED on the court record predicated upon officer’s testimony of facts and circumstances before a judicial officer. People v. Hatcher (1968) 2 Cal.App.3d 71, 82, 82 Cal.Rptr. 323, People v. Talley (1967) 65 Cal.2d 830, 56 Cal.Rptr. 492, 423 P.2d 564 Court has an OPINION in establishing probable cause. Worthington v. U.S., 166 F.2d 557, 562 Criminal activity is the STANDARD of probable cause. Hannah, 795 F.2d 1389, U.S. v. Wallraff (1983) 705 F.2d 990, Charles C (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 420, 423, Lewis (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 599, 608 The existence of probable cause must be DETERMINED by a judicial officer or the court. People v. Ingle (1966) 53 Cal.2d 407, 2 Cal.Rptr 14, 348 P.2d 577, People v. Cook (1978) 22 Cal.3d 67, 84, Gerstein v. Pugh (1975) 420 U.S. 103, 125, People v. Duarte (1967) 254 Cal.App.2d 25; 380 U.S. 102, 111; California Penal Code § 991 “…and since the court and not the officer must make the determination whether the officer’s belief was based upon reasonable cause,” People v. Duarte (1967) 254 Cal.App.2d 25, 61 Cal.Rptr 690

Arresting officer must TESTIFY or give TESTIMONY to establish probable cause. Music v. DMV (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 841, 848, People v. Welsch (1984) 151 Cal.App.App.3d 1038, In re Alonzo C. (1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 707, 713, People v. Duarte (1967) 254 Cal.App.2d 25

The existence of probable cause requires an immediate or prompt hearing before a magistrate. California Penal Code §§ 809, 991(b); Gerstein v. Pugh (1975) 423 U.S. 105

Probable cause is: (1) a procedure before trial, (2) a criminal procedure, (3) Penal Code § 991, Probable cause is found under the heading Pleadings & Proceedings Before Trial, Chapter 1. “Reasonable suspicion” to detain a motorist cannot justify “probable cause” to arrest (or search) a motorist. See Campa (1984) 36 Cal.App.3d 870, 879; Gorrostieta (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 71, 84 The in-the-presence requirement of Penal Code § 836(a)(1) has two components: (1) the person making the arrest must be able to “testify, based on his or her sense, to acts which constitute every material element” of the offense. Music v. D.M.V. (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 841, 848; People v. Welsch (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 1038; In re Alonzo C. (1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 707, 713; (2) The arrest “must be made at the time of the offense or within a reasonable time thereafter. People v. Hampton (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d. 27, 30; People v. Williams (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 554, 562. California Judges Bench Book, Search and Seizure (2nd edition), § 4.10, pg. 231 “Probable cause” means having more evidence for than against; supported by evidence which inclines the mind to believe, but some room for doubt. Ex parte Souza, 65 Cal.App. 9, 222 P.869 “Probable cause” for arrest depends upon particular facts known to arresting officer, before or at time of arrest, and such arrest must be upheld in case the facts are sufficient, in opinion of court, but if information at disposal of arresting officer is wholly insufficient to justify issuance of warrant for arrest, the arrest is illegal. Worthington v. U.S., C.C.A.Mich., 166 F.2d 557, 562 The phrase “probable cause” for the appeal, as used in C.S. § 9074, means that the appellant has grounds for his appeal that present a debatable question, and that it is not frivolous or taken for delay. Ex parte France, 224 P. 433, 434, 38 Idaho, 627

The phrase, “probable cause for appeal,” used in Rev.St. 1887, § 8048, does not mean there is no probable reason to suppose the judgment shall be reversed, but that appellant has assigned grounds on which he expects to rely which are open to doubt or honest difference of opinion. In re Neil, 87 P. 881, 12 Idaho, 749, citing In re Adams, 22 P. 547, 81 Cal. 163 In statute requiring a certificate of probable cause for appeal on appeal from order made after conviction in order to stay execution of judgment, “probable cause for appeal” does not mean that there is a probable reason to suppose that judgment will be reversed but that appellant has assigned grounds for error that are open to doubt or honest difference of opinion, and over which rational, reasonable, and honest discussion may arise. Code 1932, § 19-2709. State v. Van Vlack, Idaho, 71 P.2d 1076, 1080 “Probable cause” for arrest, as a defense to an action for false imprisonment, means a reasonable ground of suspicion, supported by circumstances. Sanders v. Davis, 44 So. 979, 983, 153 Ala. 375 Whether arrest and search without warrant was lawful depends on whether officer had “probable cause” to believe that parties arrested were engaged in commission of crime charged. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4. “Probable cause” for an arrest has been defined to be a reasonable ground of suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious man in believing the accused to be guilty. Kwong How v. United States, C.C.A. Or., 71 F.2d 71, 73 “Probable cause” has been defined as reasonable cause, and, in both civil and criminal prosecutions, as honest suspicion or belief, founded on facts sufficient to warrant reasonable man in believing charge true. MacGruer v. Denivelle, 113 Cal.App. 49, 297 P. 633 Reasonable or “probable cause” for believing that person arrested committed felony, “probable cause” being a suspicion founded upon circumstances sufficiently strong to warrnt reasonable man in belief that charge is true, is a question of law, where there is no conflict in evidence. West’s Ann.Pen. Code, § 836, subd. 3 People v. Brite, 9 Cal.2d 666, 72 P.2d 122 “Probable cause”, as basis of search by peace officer of an automobile upon a public highway without search warrant is a reasonable ground of

suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a cautious man in the belief that person accused is guilty of offense with which he is charged. Crawford v. State, 189 S.W.2d 871, 872 NOTE: If a person is charged with “cite and release” Vehicle Code violations that are “infractions”, e.g. expired registration, no license plates, failure to have driver license in possession, no proof of automobile insurance, etc., no search would be valid absent suspicion or proof of contraband or open alcoholic beverage containers. Indeed, the district court prepared and submitted special factual interrogatories which asked the jury to find whether the arrest and prosecution were privileged in that a “a reasonable, prudent officer would have believed, based upon reasonable trustworthy information, that there existed probable cause” to arrest or prosecute the plaintiff. In each instance, the jury answered “yes.” If, as the jury found, probable cause existed, Richard Moore’s claim of false arrest and malicious prosecution must be rejected. Moore v. Comesanas (2nd Cir. 1994) 32 F.3d 670, quoting Zanghi v. Incorporated Village of Old Brookville (2nd Cir. 1985) 752 F.2d 42, 45 Violations of Fourth Amendment requirement of judicial determination of probable cause as prerequisite to extended restraint of liberty following arrest are redressable under § 1983. U.S.C.A. Const. Amends. 4, 5, 14; 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 Katona v. City of Cheyenne (1988) 686 F.Supp. 287 Probable cause determination made by municipal court commissioner was constitutionally infirm; commissioner was not judicial officer, and did not have authority to issue arrest warrants, and there was no apparent constitutional or statutory basis for office of municipal court commissioner. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 4, 5, 14; 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983; Wyo.Justice and Municipal Courts Criminal Rules 1(b)(1), 4(a), (b)(1), 5(a); W.S.1977, § 78-103(b); Wyo.Const. Art. 5, §§ 1, 2. Katona v. City of Cheyenne (1988) 686 F.Supp. 287