Whether Deputy Copeland's arrest of Mr. Thompson in (2011).. Nine years after Robinson v. Solano cty., 248 F. 3d 1007(9th Cir. 2002) was unconstitutional regarding warranted the denied of qualified immunity for Copeland's conduct purposes. And Sandoval v. Las Vegas Metro Police Dept's, 756 F. 3d 1154, 1165(9th Cir. 2014).

The panel majority's analysis contridicts this rule by pointing to minor factual differences that have no bearing on Robinson's application to this case. See Supra 12-15.

Whether the panel majority's misapplication of Robinson also constitutes a Fourth Amendment violation; where Deputy Copeland used unconstitutionally excessive force, and therefore whether qualified immunity should not be available to officers who point guns at suspects under sinilar circumstances; and whether grant Deputy Copeland qualified immunity for unholstering his weapon, and pointed it at Mr. Thompson's head, and threatened to kill him if he made a wrong move, constitutes an Eighth Amendment violation.

Whether the search was motivated soley by investigory intent, a relevant question is: but for his investigory intent, would Copeland have conducted the purported inventory search.

Did the District Court err when it dismissed Thompson's failure-to-supervise claim.

Whether Deputy Copeland's arrest of Mr. Thompson was unconstitutional and warranted the denial of qualified immunity