In the 1915 case of Cerecedo v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving immigration law and deportation proceedings. The petitioner, Mr. Cerecedo, was an immigrant who had been ordered to be deported back to his home country due to involvement in illegal activities that violated U.S immigration laws - specifically for being involved in prostitution-related offenses within five years of his arrival into the United States from Mexico. Mr. Cerecedo challenged this order by arguing that he should not be subject to deportation because he had left and re-entered the US after initially arriving; therefore resetting his five-year period under consideration for such crimes according to him. The Supreme Court disagreed with Mr.Cerecedo's interpretation of law stating that it would defeat Congress' intent behind these statutes if immigrants could simply reset their clock by leaving and returning briefly before continuing with their illicit activities. Thus, they upheld lower court decisions ordering Mr.Ceracedo's deportation as they found no error in interpreting or applying relevant provisions of Immigration Act concerning deportable offenses committed within five years after entry into America regardless whether there has been voluntary departure during said period followed by return thereto.

In the dissenting opinion for Cerecedo v. United States, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through an unlawful search and seizure. He argued that such actions violated the Fourth Amendment rights of individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures. Furthermore, he contended that allowing illegally obtained evidence to be used in court would encourage law enforcement officers to continue violating citizens' constitutional rights without fear of consequences or reprimands from courts. This viewpoint emphasized respect for individual liberties and protections granted by the Constitution over procedural expediency in criminal trials.