United States v. Hunt was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a defendant could be convicted of a crime if the evidence presented at trial was obtained through an illegal search and seizure. The defendant, Hunt, was charged with receiving stolen goods, and the evidence used to convict him was obtained through a search of his home without a warrant. The Supreme Court held that the evidence was inadmissible and that Hunt could not be convicted on the basis of it. The Court reasoned that the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, and that the evidence obtained in this case was obtained in violation of that amendment. The Court also noted that the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained evidence in criminal trials, was applicable in this case. As a result, Hunt was acquitted of the charges against him.

In United States v. Hunt, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a federal court had jurisdiction over an action brought by the United States against a defendant for failing to pay taxes due on distilled spirits produced in violation of law. The majority opinion held that the district court did have jurisdiction and affirmed its decision. Justice Field dissented from this ruling, arguing that Congress had not given any authority to bring such actions in federal courts and thus they lacked jurisdiction over it. He further argued that since Congress had not provided any remedy or penalty for failure to pay taxes due on illegal production of distilled spirits, then no action could be taken against those who failed to do so without violating their constitutional rights under Article III of the Constitution. As such, he concluded that there was no basis for allowing this case before a federal court and urged reversal of the lower court's decision.