1. Second-volley rule. When an officer shoots a suspect once in the chest, steps back for cover to reload, six to eight seconds pass, and the suspect is not trying to escape, does the Fourth Amendment permit him to fire another seven shots at the suspect, or must the officer reassess the need for deadly force once the threat is no longer apparent?

2. Clearly established law (2018). By July 2018, was it clearly established under Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989), and circuit precedent that officers must stop using deadly force once the threat is subdued, such that a second volley fired blind after hitting the suspect once in the chest and a six to eight second pause violates clearly established law?

3. Totality after Barnes v. Felix. After this Court's unanimous decision in Barnes v. Felix, 605 U.S. 73 (2024), requiring courts to evaluate the totality of the circumstances—not just a "moment-of-threat"—may lower courts justify a second volley by isolating only the split-second before it was fired, or must they account for the suspect already having been shot once, six to eight seconds between volleys, and the officer's movement to cover?

Whether a police officer's second volley of shots after a six to eight second pause violates Fourth Amendment protections against excessive force