What is the current state of the law on qualified immunity for a police officer accused of malicious prosecution?

"For executive officials in general, ... qualified immunity represents the norm." (Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982) 457 U.S. 800, 807, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2732, 73 L.Ed.2d 396.) Police officers are granted a qualified immunity shielding them from liability for damages caused by their official acts "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." (Id. at p. 818, 102 S.Ct. at 2738.) Under federal law, therefore, a police officer is liable for all damages proximately caused by his or her official acts that a reasonable person would have known to violate clearly established rights, including such acts that would constitute malicious prosecution. (Cook v. Sheldon (2d Cir.1994) 41 F.3d 73, 79 ["Section 1983 liability may also be anchored in a claim for malicious prosecution, as this tort 'typically implicates constitutional rights secured by the fourteenth amendment, such as deprivation of liberty.' [Citation.]"].)