Sixth Circuit
Ciminillo v. Streicher, 434 F.3d 461, 468 (6th Cir. 2006) (“Taking the facts in the light most favorable to Ciminillo, it was objectively unreasonable for Knight to shoot Ciminillo as he attempted to leave the scene of the riot. The use of less-than-deadly force in the context of a riot against an individual displaying no aggression is not reasonable.”).
Eighth Circuit
Mitchell v. Kirchmeier, 28 F.4th 888, 898-99 (8th Cir. 2022) (concluding that officer was not entitled to qualified immunity at the motion to dismiss stage because existing law clearly established that shooting an individual who was “neither committing a serious crime nor threatening anyone’s safety nor fleeing or resisting arrest” with a shotgun loaded with a lead-filled bean bag was excessive force).
Anderson v. Avond, 20-cv-1147 (KMM/LIB), at *33 (D. Minn. Sep. 28, 2022) (“Here, as outlined in greater detail above, the question is whether it was clearly established on May 22, 2019, that Officer Vanden Avond’s shooting of a beanbag round at close range at the chest of a non-resistant and non-threatening suspected felon was unconstitutional excessive force. The Court concludes that it was – a reasonable officer would have known that this conduct was unlawful.”).
Ninth Circuit
Deorle v. Rutherford, 272 F.3d 1272, 1275 (9th Cir. 2001) (“No reasonable officer could have believed that Rutherford’s action in shooting Deorle with the ‘less lethal’ lead-filled beanbag round was appropriate or lawful.”).