Powers to ArrestQuestion 9 of 200

A security guard arrests a person believing a felony robbery occurred. Investigation reveals the suspect's roommate had given permission to take the property — no felony was in fact committed. Under §837(3), what is the guard's exposure?

a.None — good faith fully protects the private arrestor
b.Potentially liable for false arrest — §837(3) requires that 'a felony has been in fact committed'
c.Liable only for battery, not false arrest
d.Protected because reasonable cause to believe a crime occurred existed at the time

Explanation

Penal Code §837(3) requires both (1) that 'a felony has been in fact committed' AND (2) that the arrestor have reasonable cause to believe the arrestee committed it. If no felony was in fact committed — even with reasonable belief — the arrest fails to meet §837(3) and exposes the private person to false-arrest civil liability (Cervantez v. J.C. Penney Co. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 579). This is the key difference from peace-officer §836 authority, which generally protects officers acting on reasonable cause even if no crime occurred. Where §837(1) (in-presence) applies, it provides a surer authority.

Law Reference: Cal. Penal Code §837(3); Cervantez v. J.C. Penney Co. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 579

Practice all 200 questions free — no signup required.

Related questions on this topic

Last reviewed: · editorial process

PrepPass Editorial Team · Verified against California BSIS Guard Card Exam · How we review
Report