Butler’s Fourth Amendment rights by continuing to detain her after completing the search of her vehicle, this right was not clearly established in 2005, and Perez is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. A government official is immune from liability for discretionary functions, so long as the official’s conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). Qualified immunity shields “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 341, 106 S.Ct. 1092, 89 L.Ed.2d 271 (1986). “It is not necessary that the alleged acts have been pre 15, 117 S.Ct. 882, 137 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997) (<HOLDING>). Thus, we cannot say that, at the time of
holding that agents were allowed to seize and question occupants of business while executing search warrant for illegal aliens holding that it is permissible under the fourth amendment to detain occupants of a residence while executing a search warrant of the residence holding that a warrant to search for contraband founded on probable cause implicitly carries with it the limited authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted holding that officers may detain the occupants of a vehicle while executing a search warrant holding that officers executing a search warrant for contraband have the authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted