Ryburn v. Huff, 132 S. Ct. 987

Police responded to a school threat rumor at Bellarmine-Jefferson High School; school officials requested investigation.
Interviews revealed Vincent Huff had been absent and bullied; others believed he could be capable of violence.
Officers learned of potential weapons and safety risks; they proceeded to interview Vincent at his home.
Mrs. Huff did not permit interviewing inside; she refused to discuss guns and then hung up when contacted by the officers.
Huff and Vincent walked outside; officers entered the home without a warrant, citing safety concerns and potential weapons.
After a brief stay, officers concluded the rumor was false and reported their findings; district court granted qualified immunity.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the warrantless entry justified by probable imminent danger?	Ryburn	Huff	Yes; reasonable belief of imminent danger supported entry
Did the Ninth Circuit err in denying qualified immunity to petitioners?	Ryburn	Huff	No; officers could reasonably believe entry was necessary
Should the court reassess the District Court's factual findings for reasonableness?	Ryburn	Huff	Yes; court must view facts as seen by a reasonable officer
Do on-scene safety concerns allow sweeping, non-consensual home entry even without objective evidence of weapons?	Ryburn	Huff	Yes; rapidly evolving situations permit warrantless entry

Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (U.S. 2006) (imminent threat justifies warrantless entry)
Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (U.S. 2006) (respecting residence entry for safety considerations)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (reasonableness judged from perspective of officer on scene)
Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (U.S. 1978) (emergency or exigency justifies otherwise illegal acts)