With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". or when plain error is evident from the record) (internal quotation marks omitted). AFFIRMED. * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. 1 . Defendant-Appellee Jim Gillman was, at all relevant times, a law enforcement officer employed by the Texas Department of Public Safety ("TDPS”). In addition to his employment with the TDPS, Gillman was privately employed by the Cloisters Condominium Association as a courtesy officer. Although Gillman was off-duty at the time of the altercation, he is nonetheless entitled to qualified immunity as a public official. See Moore v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 62 F.3d 394, 1995 WL 449901, *2 (5th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, neither party nor the district

A: holding that under the mwa the question of whether an employee was an independent contractor or an employee was a question of statutory interpretation
B: holding chief of police an executive officer because a member of the executive branch and an officer
C: holding police officer is a public official
D: holding that when an offduty police officer working as a security guard saw a crime being committed he ceased being an employee or independent contractor  and became an onduty police officer
D.