In the case of United States v. Wong Sing, 1922, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wong Sing who was accused by an immigration officer of being illegally present in the country. The court held that a warrantless arrest made by an immigration officer without reasonable grounds to believe that the person arrested is residing unlawfully within the United States is illegal and violates Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. Furthermore, it was determined that any evidence obtained as a result of such unlawful arrest should be excluded from consideration during deportation proceedings. This ruling reinforced protections for individuals against arbitrary or unjustified arrests by law enforcement officers.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Wong Sing case, delivered by Justice McReynolds, argued that the evidence presented against Wong Sing was insufficient to warrant a conviction. He contended that there were significant gaps and inconsistencies in the testimony of key witnesses which raised reasonable doubt about Wong Sing's guilt. Furthermore, he criticized the majority for accepting circumstantial evidence as proof beyond a reasonable doubt without considering its reliability or corroborating it with other direct evidences. In his view, this approach undermined fundamental principles of justice and fairness in criminal trials where an individual’s liberty is at stake.