Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-50_n648.pdf
Page Number: 7.0

Cite as:  602 U. S. ____ (2024) 

5 

Opinion of the Court 

both,  we  reasoned,  is  “the  wrongful  initiation  of  charges 
without probable cause” (though in the Fourth Amendment 
context, those charges must cause a seizure as well).  Id., at 
43, and n. 2.  Because of that similarity, the malicious-pros-
ecution tort can inform a court’s understanding of the kind
of claim Chiaverini has brought.

The question here is whether a Fourth Amendment ma-
licious-prosecution  claim  may  succeed  when  a  baseless 
charge is accompanied by a valid charge.  The Court of Ap-
peals,  as  described  above,  answered  that  question  with  a
categorical  no:  Even  if  the  felony  count  lacked  probable 
cause, the Sixth Circuit held, Chiaverini could not recover 
because  the  misdemeanor  counts  were  adequately  sup-
ported.  See supra, at 3–4.  But a funny thing happened on 
the way to this Court.  The officers now agree with Chia-
verini that there is no such flat bar.  See Brief for Officers 
24–27; Brief for Chiaverini 2–3.  And the United States as 
amicus  curiae  also  argues  that  the  Sixth  Circuit  rule  is 
wrong.  See Brief for United States 10.  We agree with them 
all.  Consistent with both the Fourth Amendment and tra-
ditional common-law practice, courts should evaluate suits 
like Chiaverini’s charge by charge.

Consider  first  how  that  result  follows  from  established 
Fourth  Amendment  law.    Under  that  Amendment,  a  pre-
trial  detention  (like  the  one  Chiaverini  suffered)  must  be
based  on  probable  cause.    See  Manuel,  580  U. S.,  at  364– 
369 .  Otherwise, such a detention counts as an unreasona-
ble seizure.  And even when a detention is justified at the
outset, it may become unreasonably prolonged if the reason 
for it lapses.  See Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U. S. 348, 
354–357  (2015).  So  if  an  invalid  charge—say,  one  fabri-
cated by police officers—causes a detention either to start 
or  to  continue,  then  the  Fourth  Amendment  is  violated. 
And  that  is  so  even  when  a  valid  charge  has  also  been 
brought  (although,  as  soon  noted,  that  charge  may  well 
complicate the causation issue, see infra, at  7).  Take the