Did the Eighth Circuit depart from this Court's decision in Kisela v. Hughes, __ U.S. _, 188 S. Ct. 1148 (2018) (per curiam) and numerous other cases by denying qualified immunity notwithstanding the absence of clearly established law imposing liability under circumstances closely analogous to those confronting Petitioner?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioner, Detective Cody Ross, was in plain clothes conducting surveillance in a truck parked in front of the home of respondent Johnnie Rochell Jr., who pulled into his driveway, exited his vehicle and attempted to get Ross’s attention. Ross motioned for Rochell to wait a minute. Rochell left, returned with an assault rifle slung around his body, and approached Ross. Ross exited the truck, weapon drawn, and commanded Rochell to drop the rifle. Rochell dropped the weapon. Ross told Rochell to get on the ground, eventually pushing him down. Confronted with a suspect who had not yet been searched for other weapons, was not handcuffed, had an assault weapon several feet away, and with backup officers only just arriving, Ross allegedly put his gun to Rochell’s head and said he would shoot him if he ever came up on Ross with a weapon like that again. When another officer secured Rochell’s arms, Ross retrieved handcuffs from his truck and handcuffed Rochell, who was subsequently convicted of disorderly conduct for approaching Ross with the assault rifle. The questions presented are: 1. Did the Eighth Circuit depart from this Court’s decision in Kisela v. Hughes, __ U.S. _, 188 S. Ct. 1148 (2018) (per curiam) and numerous other cases by denying qualified immunity notwithstanding the absence of clearly established law imposing liability under circumstances closely analogous to those confronting Petitioner? li QUESTIONS PRESENTED—Continued 2. Did the Eighth Circuit depart from this Court’s decisions in Graham v. Connor, 490 US. 386 (1989) and Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 US. 765 (2014) in denying qualified immunity based upon the absence of a constitutional violation given that the undisputed facts established that petitioner acted reasonably in responding to the potential threat of an unrestrained suspect whose weapon—an assault rifle—was only several feet away?