With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". affidavit was properly stricken, the relevant facts for analyzing summary judgment are the un-controverted ones in Defendants’ motion. Thom further contends that the. district court erred in granting Officers .McGary and Bryant qualified immunity from his § 1983 claim. We review a grant of summary judgment on the issue of qualified immunity de novo. Curtis v. Anthony, 710 F.3d 587, 593 (5th Cir. 2013) (per curiam). “A public official is entitled to qualified immunity unless the plaintiff demonstrates that (1) the defendant violated the plaintiffs constitutional rights and (2) the defendant’s actions were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly established law at the time of the violation. uent arrest of Thorn. See Resendiz v. Miller, 203 F.3d 902, 903 (5th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Based on the totality of the circumstances

A: holding that warrantless arrest based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment
B: holding  1983 action lies for warrantless arrest without probable cause
C: holding that a warrantless arrest on probable cause does not violate the fourth amendment even if state law required the police to have prior authorization
D: holding that a search of a students purse that was not based on probable cause did not violate the fourth amendment
A.