Whether there was clearly established precedent that the officers' use of force against Weddle, who had surrendered and posed no immediate threat, violated the Fourth Amendment

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Whether under a qualified immunity analysis there existed clearly established precedent that taking down Weddle when he had surrendered, posed no immediate threat to the safety of officers, was not actively resisting arrest, was compliant to officer commands and was not attempting to flee put Officer Nutzman on notice that his conduct was unlawful. (2) Whether under a qualified immunity analysis there existed clearly established precedent that kicking Weddle while he was sitting on the tarmac with hands cuffed behind his back and surrounded by officers put Officer Olson on notice that his conduct was unlawful.