Was the officer's arrest of Petitioner with a warrant based on clearly established law?

QUESTION PRESENTED: 1. Was the following “clearly established law” at the time of the officer’s arrest of Petitioner with a warrant: The officer made misleading and material representations in his affidavit for the warrant; if he could have made the arrest without a warrant, he is entitled to qualified immunity. Franks v. long forbade intentionally false or _ recklessly misleading in affidavits to obtain warrants. Hicks v. long held that a state’s failure to follow its own law violates due process. Texas’ own law had _ long _ disallowed warrantless arrests, unless the offense was committed in the officer’s presence or was a felony with the accused about to escape, neither of which exceptions applies here.