Dague

MEMORANDUM **

Kevin Dumesic, Greg Hazen and Mike Horn appeal the district court’s denial of qualified immunity in this Section 1983 excessive force suit. We reverse. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here. We review the denial of qualified immunity de novo. See Lee v. Gregory, 363 F.3d 931, 932 (9th Cir.2004).

*396 To determine whether a government employee is entitled to qualified immunity, we apply the familiar two-part test set forth by the Supreme Court in Saucier v. Katz, 538 U.S. 194 , 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151 , 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001). First, we must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the defendants violated Dague’s constitutional rights. Id. If we determine that a constitutional violation has occurred, we must then determine whether Dague’s rights were clearly established at the time of the violation. Id.

In Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 , 105 S.Ct. 1694 , 85 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985), the Supreme Court articulated a “more particularized version of the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness analysis” in cases of deadly force. Blanford v. Sacramento…