In the 1932 case of Grau v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving tax evasion and fraud. The defendant, Mr. Grau, was convicted for evading taxes by falsely claiming deductions for alleged losses from sales of property to his wife and children at prices significantly below their actual value. He appealed this conviction arguing that he had not received a fair trial because certain evidence was admitted which should have been excluded as it violated his constitutional rights against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court upheld Mr. Grau's conviction stating that there were no grounds for reversal since he voluntarily provided information about these transactions during an investigation conducted by revenue officers who made it clear they were investigating possible criminal violations related to income tax laws. Furthermore, the court held that even if some statements might have been inadmissible due to being compelled or involuntary (which wasn't proven), any error would be harmless given other overwhelming evidence supporting guilt including testimony from family members involved in transactions and documentary proof showing false claims regarding property values.

In the dissenting opinion for GRAU v. UNITED STATES, 1932, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold Grau's conviction on charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States government was flawed. The dissenting justices believed that there wasn't sufficient evidence presented at trial to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Grau had knowingly participated in a scheme designed to deceive and cheat the federal government out of tax revenue. They contended that while some circumstantial evidence suggested possible wrongdoing on his part, this did not meet the high standard required for criminal convictions under U.S law. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential violations of due process rights given what they saw as an overreliance on hearsay testimony and other forms of indirect evidence during proceedings against him.