Whether police violated the Fourth Amendment by arresting the petitioner without probable cause

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED otra Why were Police Plloued 4p vilote MY fourth ymewdmnentt bird by pieeestnig me withook PRObobIe CHee Lop the chnrge of Bundlowy of n vehicle, buf ARK they Inveshoakd AN Nothing tunntedd y to pve "ebay even toh place. T wos el held unde rienesl pid told mn ines by pele Ts M UNA tex beng TH Meal to the police otter Twas then Neannested and minpuoheal agua fon hajenvated O5600H soit Q deadly Weapon, e How 4 Tae fon ADH Ag gb before # OnnKid Jury to seeune vai edi chnrentt haseol pnt inevétorentt Aico {rainfed evidence, T was Fue wi thoyt Ptobable enyse fon bung oF # vehicle pind wher there W05 No evidenice 4p Prove the Popa J 4 onl held fon houro 4} I woe later Mgictontecl fon ma OF Rag aveeed aibbedy weap ol Prd Felon PorHeOION OF 1 Fine pH, The Dao ren Phe US ily 2urdencg Tb prove the Vielims rllegetio thot lop hehe his vehidle y ud he wie a Pivlectag his Properie Pd thi wpe god P Senceles wthich brdlly moiveded. Thewe wys _ Hp i dene 4p Prove L wes even py the puop eet being hs though T was Attesteal in) adothen percenls Yad. This Bo ak Awowe thet police wothslal” A birseol nvechgal +b 5ee who Fined the weap oe ; oe nly Ne tooted Foy, Gun nesidue, Tye beer held Fon ¥lms| thnee eons y “ene thet dye otete eppld Not prove The rng that cased Hye INCH eHt one toh place,-the }p 1s well awawe OF 45,7 — How 15 i pip To the Hecused 4 be vilourely antestad deptivedt olye proves, Gnd hon) tnidl 5 4 othe yl) Hl ahes 0 famed Tb Cone! PME wher proper tAvehigciond Tutns up Nething IN The wou of fonossion 4» Sry he kag PenOM I> tmnest on Hf . FOime was e yoy wmmigl mend to Tete low, Preepeortion. ty MY C8 dT py ne MONG thet haley “Lane does hot wieod phypiel wvidenee, How i>+hed Fg.