# Ryburn v. Huff **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 24, 2012, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ryburn-v-huff/610522 "2012-01-24T19:05:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 16
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2012, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ryburn-v-huff/610522/16 "2012-01-25T00:54:58Z")
> [@Beer of Choice](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beer-of-choice/74039/14): > > Who knows what actually happened, but it’s irrelevant here though. Ummm, what actually happened is just about the only relevant thing here. It was a very fact specific ruling, so “what actually happened” was vitally important. [Quote=Bone] Simply going back inside or even running doesn’t rise to the level of exigent circumstances. At least it shouldn’t. [/quote] If that were the only thing that happened here, you’d be absolutely right. But, as the opinion points out, that wasn’t the only thing that happened, and looking at the facts as discrete events ignores the totality of the circumstances. [Quote=Bone] The 4th amendment loses again. This was wrongly decided. [/QUOTE] The inflated rhetoric aside, I’m ha ing trouble getting worked up over a case where it seems to me the police were far more interested in stopping potential violence than gathering evidence or harassing people. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ryburn-v-huff/610522)._