1. Does probable cause exist to stop, search, arrest, and prosecute a criminal suspect for evading arrest where unrefuted video evidence and the suspect's own admissions demonstrate that he refused to yield to the traffic stop, subsequently briefly stopped, and then accelerated away again?

2. Where an appellate panel is not in agreement about whether an underlying constitutional violation has occurred, how can the panel subsequently conclude that the law is "clearly established" such that a law enforcement officer is not entitled to qualified immunity for the claimed constitutional violation?

Whether probable cause exists to stop, search, arrest, and prosecute a criminal suspect for evading arrest based on video evidence showing the suspect refused to yield to a traffic stop, briefly stopped, and then accelerated away, and whether qualified immunity can be denied when an appellate panel disagrees on whether an underlying constitutional violation occurred