Wrong. If a wanted subject comes to their immediate attention the arrest takes precedence, whereas, a search warrant can be delayed (unless the court specified the times/dates) at the option of the agency conducting the search.
No, they have to have a warrant.
You should contact the police department that made the arrest and inquire there.
Never, because shooting somebody is breaking the law and murder.
Under many circumstances, yes. It is public, after all.
You would get a lawyer.
Fleeing an open warrant "flight to avoid prosecution" is similar to arrest resistance but "resisting arrest" occurs as you use force to avoid being placed under custody.Added: You NEVER have a lawful/legal "right" to "resist" police in the performance of their duty. You must submit, and if it subsequently turns out they had no lawful right to arrest you then you can bring court action against them for damages.
Yes, but you never HAVE to enter their car unless you are under arrest. Unfortunately, if you ask, "am I under arrest" the answer will usually be yes even in situations where they would have let you go.
If the police have articulable probable cause to place you under arrest at the time they made the arrest, they may do so at any time and in any place. Insufficient information is given in the question about the issuance of the warrant, which may have been for an entirely different cause. If the police made an illegal arrest it is a defensible reason for the dropping of the charges.
The police cannot search a vehicle unless they have a warrant for an arrest on the driver or any passenger, or they have reason to suspect that person is under the influence of drugs or alcohol use, or committed robbery or something. But, if a person runs a red light, that is reason enough to believe anything.For officer safety, they can search the "lunge area," the area immediately within the drivers reach. Also, they don't have to have a warrant for arrest, they can perform an "administrative (inventory) search" subsequent to the arrest of the driver, if the driver is arrested for any reason, warrant or not. "Reason to suspect" is not adequate; they have to have "probable cause." While running a red light might be reason enough for "mere suspicion," it is not enough to search the entire vehicle. They can also ask the driver for consent to search (which should never be granted); most give consent even when they know there are illegal items in the vehicle. (I guess they think they will look suspicious if they don't and that the police won't find anything.) And finally, if a narcotics detection dog alerts on the outside of the vehicle, that gives probable cause to search.
By consenting to anything the police ask you, you are waiving your rights. The Supreme Court ruled that the police do not have to inform you of all your rights (just your Miranda rights when being placed under-arrest) nor do they have to be honest when trying to get you to waive your rights. A good lawyer might could argue that probable cause wasn't established so the search is inadmissible, but chances are slim that a Judge will buy it.
The vehicle can be searched with probable cause, or if the car is being impounded an inventory will be done. The police do sometimes ask for permission as well, and that is another way the search can be valid.
Please define what you mean by "turned in." If a witness observed the offense and turned your name over to the police, yes, of course, that information may be used to identify and arrest you.