Opinion ID: 770823
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Failure to Arrest

Text: 59 Plaintiffs first argue that the defendants violated their constitutional rights because they could have arrested the criminal suspects before the armed robberies occurred, and, thus, avoided the need to use deadly force. Plaintiffs' argument lacks merit. 60 There is no constitutional right to be arrested. The police are not required to guess at their peril the precise moment at which they have probable cause to arrest a suspect, risking a violation of the Fourth Amendment if they act too soon, and a violation of the Sixth Amendment if they wait too long. Law enforcement officers are under no constitutional duty to call a halt to a criminal investigation the moment they have the minimum evidence to establish probable cause, a quantum of evidence which may fall far short of the amount necessary to support a criminal conviction. 61 Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293, 310 (1966). Plaintiffs' allegations that the SIS officers deliberately allowed Cunningham and Soly to commit their crimes, despite having probable cause to arrest them, does not state a violation of a constitutional right.