In the case of Glickstein v. United States, 1911, the U.S Supreme Court upheld a lower court's conviction of Samuel Glickstein for conspiracy to defraud the government by using counterfeit stamps on cigar boxes. The defense argued that there was insufficient evidence and that certain exhibits were improperly admitted into evidence during trial. However, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., writing for a unanimous court, stated that it was not within their purview to review all aspects of evidentiary procedure from lower courts unless gross errors had been made or rights had been infringed upon in some way. He further noted that while some pieces of evidence may have seemed irrelevant at first glance, they could still contribute towards establishing intent or motive in criminal cases such as this one. Therefore, he concluded that no legal error had occurred which would justify overturning Glickstein’s conviction.

In the dissenting opinion for Glickstein v. United States, it was argued that the defendant's constitutional rights were violated due to a lack of sufficient evidence to support his conviction. The justice believed that there was no direct proof linking Glickstein to any conspiracy or fraudulent activity, and thus he should not have been found guilty based on mere conjecture or suspicion. Furthermore, they contended that some of the testimony used against him had been improperly admitted into court proceedings because it lacked relevance and could potentially prejudice jurors against him unfairly. They also criticized the majority's interpretation of certain laws related to fraud and conspiracy as overly broad in scope which could lead to potential misuse in future cases by criminalizing innocent behavior. Therefore, they concluded that Glickstein’s conviction should be overturned due its unconstitutionality.