In the case of Sherman v. United States in 1894, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on an issue related to entrapment and its validity as a defense in criminal cases. The defendant, John W. Sherman, was convicted for selling morphine without a written order from a physician which violated federal law at that time. However, he argued that he had been entrapped by government agents who induced him into committing this crime when otherwise he would not have done so. The court held that while it is permissible for officers or employees of the government to trap criminals and obtain evidence against them necessary for conviction through decoys and pretenses, they cannot instigate crimes just to prosecute them later on; doing so would be considered entrapment. However, in this particular case where there were conflicting testimonies about whether or not entrapment occurred - with one side claiming inducement by government officials while others denied such claims - it was deemed appropriate to leave these factual matters up to the jury's discretion rather than making it purely a question of law decided by judges alone.

In the dissenting opinion for Sherman v. United States, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and could potentially lead to an abuse of power by law enforcement officials. He contended that entrapment should not be used as a means to convict individuals who were otherwise innocent until they were induced into committing illegal acts by government agents. Brewer believed this practice violated principles of fairness and justice, arguing it is fundamentally wrong for the government to instigate crime only to punish it later on. Furthermore, he expressed concern over potential misuse of such tactics in future cases if left unchecked or unregulated.