with instructions to review the record and determine whether there are disputed issues of fact as to Mehserle’s involvement with Anicete’s, Reyes’s, and Nigel Bryson’s detentions. 5. The district court properly denied Mehserle qualified immunity from Jack Bryson’s unlawful arrest claim. Mehserle arrested Jack Bryson on Pirone’s order to arrest “him and him,” and argued before the district court that he made a reasonable mistake when he arrested the wrong “him,” Jack Bryson. (Pirone testified that he meant for Mehserle to arrest Grant and Greer.) The district court denied Mehserle qualified immunity for the arrest, concluding that whether Mehserle’s mistake was reasonable is a question for the jury. We agree. See, e.g., Wilkins v. City of Oakland, 350 F.3d 949, 955-56 (9th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). Mehserle argues that he is otherwise entitled
holding any fact that increases the mandatory minimum is an element that must be submitted to the jury holding that factual issues essential to determining whether state law bar applied should be submitted to a jury holding that the question of whether officers made a reasonable mistake when they shot their own undercover colleague must be submitted to a jury holding facts that increase the maximum penalty for a crime must be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt holding that trial court did not commit reversible error when it submitted admissibility of evidence question to jury because the trial court had independently decided the question