context: The question to be answered for the purposes of qualified immunity is "whether a reasonable officer could have believed that the use of force alleged was objectively reasonable in light of the circumstances."
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 45 F.3d 178, 184
citation_a.parenthetical: affirming grant of summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity where "a reasonable police officer certainly could have believed that the limited force applied was proper and was not unconstitutionally excessive in light of clearly established law"
citation_a.sentence: Lennon, 66 F.3d at 425; see Edwards v. Giles, 51 F.3d 155, 157 (8th Cir.1995) (reversing district court’s denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, where force used was “objectively reasonable in the circumstances”); see also Jones v. Webb, 45 F.3d 178, 184 (7th Cir.1995) (affirming grant of summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity where “a reasonable police officer certainly could have believed that the limited force applied was proper and was not unconstitutionally excessive in light of clearly established law”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 51 F.3d 155, 157
citation_b.parenthetical: reversing district court's denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, where force used was "objectively reasonable in the circumstances"
citation_b.sentence: Lennon, 66 F.3d at 425; see Edwards v. Giles, 51 F.3d 155, 157 (8th Cir.1995) (reversing district court’s denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds, where force used was “objectively reasonable in the circumstances”); see also Jones v. Webb, 45 F.3d 178, 184 (7th Cir.1995) (affirming grant of summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity where “a reasonable police officer certainly could have believed that the limited force applied was proper and was not unconstitutionally excessive in light of clearly established law”).