Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
and the initiation of criminal proceedings against him, and seizing Colon-Andino’s property — e.g. his weapons permit and gun — without probable cause. Each one of these factual allegations alone clearly constitutes a plausible Fourth Amendment violation. Together the claims allege malicious prosecution on the part of defendants against Colon-Andino. The First Circuit Court of Appeals has “assumed without deciding that malicious prosecution can, under some circumstances, embody a violation of the Fourth Amendment and thus ground a cause of action under section 1983.” Nieves v. McSweeney, 241 F.3d 46, 54 (1st Cir.2001) (quoting Roche v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 81 F.3d 249, 256 (1st Cir.1996)); Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 275-76, 114 S.Ct. 807, 127 L.Ed.2d 114 (1994). To establish malicious prosecution under
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that an alleged deprivation of the right to be free from prosecution without probable cause might be judged under the fourth amendment
B. holding that the fourth amendment right implicated in a malicious prosecution action is the right to be free of unreasonable seizure of the person
C. holding that there is no substantive due process right under the fourteenth amendment to be free from malicious prosecution
D. holding fourth amendment protects right to be free from arrest without probable cause
E. holding that there is no fourteenth amendment substantive due process right to be free from malicious prosecution and suggesting that such a cause of action might lie under the fourth amendment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.