Arrest with a warrant describes?

• A. Arrest with a warrant requires the officer to always have the warrant in hand at the moment of arrest.
• B. An arrest by a peace officer pursuant to a warrant is lawful whether or not the officer has the warrant in his/her possession at the time of the arrest.
• C. Warrants must be shown to the arrestee only after the arrest is completed.
• D. Warrants are not required if the arrestee is cooperative.

Answer: (B)

Arrest warrants give the officer authority to seize a named person, and that authority exists independent of whether the officer is physically holding the warrant at the moment of arrest. If the warrant is valid and properly issued, the arrest is lawful as the officer is acting under judicial authorization, even if the paper isn’t on them during the actual arrest. The crucial point is the existence and validity of the warrant, not the momentary possession of the document.

Showing the warrant to the arrestee can happen at or after the arrest, but the legality of the arrest does not hinge on having the document in hand at the precise instant. The other statements shortcut or misstate how warrants work: requiring the warrant to be in the officer’s hand at all times is too rigid; requiring showings only after the arrest ignores how the authority is derived; and saying cooperation eliminates the need for a warrant contradicts the basic principle that the warrant provides the legal basis for the arrest.