> [Corrigan] now appeals the grant of summary judgment to the defendants, challenging the district court’s rulings that there was no constitutional violation and that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity.

Also interesting is how close this case was: the appeals court panel was split 2-1. The dissenting judge agrees that there was a constitutional violation, but says this law was not "clearly established" so the officers should have immunity. It goes to show how low the qualified immunity bar is.