Did the Fifth Circuit panel majority err in reversing Kaufman County's summary judgment after concluding Officer Hinds did not violate clearly established law?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW On the morning of April 27, 2013, Deputy Sheriff Matthew Hinds and fellow officers were dispatched to a rural neighborhood in Kaufman County, Texas, after 911 dispatchers received panicked phone calls from neighbors reporting that a suspect was terrorizing the neighborhood, threatening them, and brandishing and/or shooting a handgun. Shortly after Hinds’ arrival at the scene, the suspect, whom Hinds spotted in the middle of the roadway, fired a gun in his direction. After losing sight of the suspect among houses and trees, Hinds and other arriving officers slowly approached his last known location. Gabriel Winzer suddenly emerged into the roadway riding toward the officers on a bicycle. After seeing that Winzer appeared to be carrying a weapon, one of the officers stated he had “that gun” and another officer yelled for Winzer to “put the gun down.” Shortly thereafter, Hinds and the officers opened fire; Winzer was shot, fell off his bicycle but arose and disappeared again. The officers located Winzer nearby in the backyard of a residence where he later passed away. 1. Did the Fifth Circuit panel majority err in reversing Kaufman County’s summary judgment after concluding Officer Hinds did not violate clearly established law? 2. Didthe Fifth Circuit panel majority improperly retain Kaufman County as a defendant by concluding that Officer Hinds may have violated a constitutional right by evaluating his use of il force from the perspective of the Respondents? 3. Did the Fifth Circuit panel majority improperly second-guess the reasonableness of Officer Hinds’ use of force without due regard to the circumstances he encountered?