In the case of Harry Fleisher et al. v. United States in 1937, the defendants were convicted for conspiring to defraud the United States by impeding, impairing, obstructing and defeating its lawful governmental functions through fraudulent claims against it and its departments. The Supreme Court upheld their convictions on appeal despite arguments that there was insufficient evidence to support them. The court found that while some of the individual pieces of evidence might not have been enough on their own to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, when taken together they provided sufficient proof for conviction. This included circumstantial evidence such as suspicious behavior or actions which suggested knowledge of illegal activities. Furthermore, it was held that even if no single act committed by any defendant amounted to an overt act in furtherance of conspiracy (a necessary element for conviction), all acts considered collectively could satisfy this requirement. This decision reinforced previous rulings stating that courts should consider all available evidence cumulatively rather than individually when determining whether there is enough proof for a conviction.

In the dissenting opinion for Harry Fleisher et al. v. United States, it was argued that the evidence presented in court did not conclusively prove that the defendants were guilty of conspiracy to defraud the government through mail fraud and bribery. The dissenting justices believed there was a lack of direct proof linking all accused parties to an overarching scheme or plan, which is essential for a conviction on conspiracy charges. They also questioned whether some pieces of evidence had been interpreted too broadly by lower courts, potentially leading to wrongful convictions based on circumstantial associations rather than concrete actions or agreements between defendants. Furthermore, they expressed concern over potential violations of due process rights if individuals could be convicted based solely on association with others who have committed crimes without clear proof that they themselves participated in illegal activities.