Did the Tenth Circuit err in denying Petitioners qualified immunity on Dalton's Equal Protection claim

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Respondent’s decedent Nikki Bascom and Silver City Police Department Captain Marcello (Mark) Contreras were involved in a romantic relationship for several years. In March 2016, Contreras began accusing Bascom of having an affair with her coworker. On March 9, 2016, Bascom’s son called 911 to report that Contreras had threatened to kill himself following an argument. On March 21, 2016, Bascom reported to SCPD Chief Ed Reynolds that Contreras had harassed the man he believed she was having an affair with; Chief Reynolds told Contreras to stop his behavior. On the morning of April 21, 2016, Bascom reported to Chief Reynolds that Contreras had stopped in front of her vehicle and taken her phone. Chief Reynolds placed Contreras on administrative leave shortly after 1:00 p.m. At approximately 4:30 p.m., Contreras killed Nikki Bascom and then himself. On behalf of Ms. Bascom’s estate and her minor children, Respondent filed this case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging inter alia that Chief Reynolds and Captain Villalobos, Petitioners here, violated Bascom’s Equal Protection rights by failing to provide her with police protection. Under the particular facts of this case: I. Did the Tenth Circuit err in denying Petitioners qualified immunity on Dalton’s Equal Protection claim where it was not clearly established that police officers in Petitioners’ position would have been on notice that their conduct in March and April 2016 was unconstitutional (i.e. where no Equal Protection jurisprudence from this Court squarely governed the particular facts of this case)? II. For purposes of qualified immunity, can a federal court of appeals decision constitute clearly established law? (i)