The Coffin v. United States case in 1895 was a landmark decision that established the presumption of innocence of a person accused of crimes. The defendants, Frederick A. Coffin and William P. Hyde, were charged with conspiracy to defraud the U.S government by submitting false claims for payment on mail transportation contracts through their company, Star Route Service. They appealed their conviction arguing that the trial judge failed to instruct jurors about presuming innocence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt - an instruction which had been common practice but not yet officially recognized as law. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Coffin and Hyde stating that it is a fundamental principle in our justice system to presume one's innocence until guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt; this principle provides balance against the state’s power when prosecuting individuals for alleged crimes. This ruling set precedent for all future criminal trials within American jurisprudence where burden proof lies with prosecution rather than defense.

In the dissenting opinion for Coffin v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a jury instruction regarding presumption of innocence was incorrect. He believed that this particular instruction could potentially confuse jurors and lead them to believe they were required to find defendants innocent until proven guilty beyond all possible doubt, rather than beyond reasonable doubt - which is the standard in criminal cases. This distinction, he argued, might result in juries acquitting defendants who should be convicted based on evidence meeting the 'reasonable doubt' threshold but falling short of absolute certainty. Furthermore, Justice Harlan contended that it was unnecessary for courts to provide such an instruction because jurors would naturally lean towards favoring innocence due their inherent reluctance to condemn fellow citizens without substantial proof of guilt.