With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". for various larcenies, see Stansbury v. Wertman, 721 F.3d 84, 94 (2d Cir. 2013) (concluding that officer had probable cause to effect arrest where, inter alia, arrestee had “previous arrest for a similar crime”); and (4) Coderre had failed to r s and conclude that they are without merit. We, therefore, AFFIRM the judgment of the district court. 1 . Although the district court resolved this issue on the basis of qualified immunity — and the corresponding standard of arguable probable cause — we need not reach the arguable probable cause question here. Because a corrected affidavit would still provide probable cause to arrest Coderre, the record does not show a violation of Coderre’s Fourth Amendment right. See Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 236, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (<HOLDING>), overruling in part Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S.

A: holding that qualified immunity is not merely immunity from damages but also immunity from suit
B: holding appellate courts have jurisdiction over the district courts orders rejecting as a matter of law qualified immunity raised in a motion to dismiss
C: holding that courts have discretion to decide in which order to address prongs of qualified immunity analysis
D: holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity
C.