Whether a reviewing court should limit the facts considered when determining qualified immunity

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. In deciding whether qualified immunity applies, the court is to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Is it appropriate, however, for a reviewing court to use that standard to limit the facts considered, and not consider all the facts, when determining whether qualified immunity applies? 2. Is a peace officer entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 where no binding authority at the time of the incident had clearly established a constitutional violation by any officers acting under similar factual circumstances?