In the United States v. Sutton case of 1909, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land patents and mining rights in Colorado. The defendant, Sutton, had obtained a patent for land under an act that allowed individuals to purchase public lands containing coal deposits. However, he was accused by the government of fraudulently obtaining this patent with no intention to mine coal but instead intending to exploit its valuable gold and silver deposits. The court held that even if Sutton's intentions were fraudulent at the time of application, it did not invalidate his claim because he complied with all statutory requirements when applying for his patent. Therefore, regardless of intent or subsequent discovery of other minerals on the property after issuance of a valid patent title based on compliance with law cannot be impeached or annulled.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Sutton, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a conviction based on evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the defendant. The dissenting justices contended that allowing such evidence to be used in court would set a dangerous precedent, effectively condoning unlawful police conduct and undermining citizens' constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. They believed that any evidence obtained illegally should be excluded from trial proceedings as its admission not only infringes upon individual liberties but also compromises judicial integrity by involving courts in illicit activities indirectly. Furthermore, they asserted this ruling could potentially encourage law enforcement officers to disregard constitutional safeguards with impunity if it leads to securing convictions.