was not unlawful). We will assume without deciding, therefore, that Guevara’s detention was an arrest. Guevara argues that the discovery of a hidden compartment containing cardboard and plastic was insufficient to give the troopers probable cause to arrest. Gue vara maintains that because the troopers did not know with any degree of certainty that there were drugs hidden in the compartment, they .lacked probable cause to arrest her. We disagree. Whether officers make a formal arrest or a detention ripens into an arrest, “[a] warrantless arrest is consistent with the Fourth Amendment if it is supported by probable cause.” Ulrich v. Pope Cnty., 715 F.3d 1054, 1059 (8th Cir.2013) (quoting Borgman v. Kedley, 646 F.3d 518, 522-23 (8th Cir.2011)); see also Martinez, 462 F.3d at 907, 910 (<HOLDING>). “Probable cause to make a warrantless arrest
holding that if the trial court would have had no discretion to deny summary judgment on an alternative ground the appellate court can on that alternative ground sustain the order granting summary judgment holding that the language if the merits were reached the result would be the same is a contrarytofact holding not an alternative holding emphasis in original holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting alternative perpetrator evidence where the record demonstrated the supposed alternative perpetrator was near the victim no more than ten minutes before the crime holding that we may affirm on an alternative basis supported by the record holding in the alternative that even if handcuffing a suspect did convert the detention into an arrest the arrest was justified by probable cause