Is the test for clearly established law being properly applied within the Eighth Circuit?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW I. A split exists within the Eighth Circuit concerning how narrowly or broadly existing precedent is to be applied in finding clearly established law for qualified immunity purposes. This split is causing disparate results based on the makeup of randomly assigned panels. As justice cannot hinge on a randomly assigned panel, is the test for clearly established law being properly applied within the Eighth Circuit? II. When the proper standard is applied, is it clearly established that an officer repeatedly striking a prone, non-resisting suspect — who is physically restrained by four other officers — in the face for 40 seconds constitutes excessive force under the Fourth Amendment?