to show that qualified immunity should not apply.” Id. To overcome qualified immunity, Plaintiffs must show that: “(1) the defendant violated a constitutional right, and (2) this right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.” Holloman ex rel. Holloman v. Harland, 370 F.3d 1252, 1264 (11th Cir.2004). We may consider these questions in any order. See Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 2074, 2080, 179 L.Ed.2d 1149 (2011). B. The Over-Detention Claims As for the over-detention claims, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees to individuals the right to be free from excessive continued detention after a jail or prison ceases to have a legal right to detain the individual. See Cannon v. Macon Cnty., 1 F.3d 1558, 1562-63 (11th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Douthit v. Jones, 619 F.2d 527, 532 (5th
holding that there is no substantive due process right under the fourteenth amendment to be free from malicious prosecution holding that the fourteenth amendment incorporated the sixth amendment right to counsel recognizing that the sixth amendment guarantees the right to effective assistance of counsel recognizing that the sixth amendment guarantees a defendant the right to counsel and the right to waive counsel holding that the fourteenth amendment guarantees the right to be free from continued detention after it was or should have been known that the detainee was entitled to release