seniorjudge said:
Cite your legal authority for these statements.
Respondent McLaughlin brought a class action seeking injunctive and de- claratory relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging that petitioner County of Riverside (County) violated the holding of Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, by failing to provide "prompt"
JUDICIAL (you do understand what judicial means don't you?) DETERMINATIONS OF PROBABLE CAUSE to persons who, like himself, were arrested without a warrant. The County combines such determinations with arraignment procedures which, under County policy, must be conducted within two days of ar- rest, excluding weekends and holidays. The County moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting that McLaughlin lacked standing to bring the suit because the time for providing him a "prompt" probable cause deter- mination had already passed and he had failed to show, as required by Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, that he would again be subject to the allegedly unconstitutional conduct. The District Court never explic- itly ruled on the motion to dismiss, but accepted for filing a second amended complaint -- the operative pleading here -- which named re- spondents James, Simon, and Hyde as additional individual plaintiffs and class representatives, and alleged that each of them had been arrested without a warrant, had not received a prompt probable cause hearing, and was still in custody.
You need more?
Aguilar v. Texas 378 US 108
Spinelli v. United States 393 US 410
Just let me know. Now where is your authority (if any you have) that a cop makes a determination of probable cause???????