that the radar gun in Tarver’s cruiser was working in August 2005. He also noted that the radar gun became inoperable approximately one year earlier, but that it had been fully repaired by the time of Deville’s first arrest. 5 . These events occurred after the events at issue in this case. See infra p. 171-72. Prior to his resignation from the Evangeline Parish Sheriffs Office, Tarver worked contemporaneously for both the Sheriff's Office and the Village of Turkey Creek Police Department on a part-time basis. 6 . Although we conclude infra that Marcantel is entitled to qualified immunity because he relied on Tarver’s statements, that reliance does not make an otherwise unconstitutional arrest lawful. See Whiteley v. Warden, 401 U.S. 560, 568-69, 91 S.Ct. 1031, 28 L.Ed.2d 306 (1971) (<HOLDING>); see also Rogers v. Powell, 120 F.3d 446,
holding that the courts determination of whether an officer had probable cause for an arrest is an independent and objective determination and an officers own subjective reason for the arrest is irrelevant holding that an otherwise illegal arrest cannot be insulated from challenge by the decision of the instigating officer to rely on fellow officers to make the arrest holding that a cause of action for illegal arrest and false imprisonment accrued at the time plaintiff was released from his alleged illegal restraint and not when the proceedings by which his arrest occurred terminated holding that initial illegal detention does not call into question validity of arrest pursuant to valid warrant wjhere the police effectuate an arrest in an illegal manner but nonetheless have probable cause to make the arrest the proper fourth amendment remedy is to exclude only that evidence which is a fruit of the illegality holding that force exerted against an officer after an arrest is complete cannot be used as the basis for prosecuting one for resisting arrest