In Wyman v. United States (1923), the Supreme Court ruled on a case involving tax evasion. The defendant, Wyman, was accused of evading taxes by not reporting income from selling stocks and bonds during 1917 and 1918. He argued that he had sold these assets at a loss and therefore did not owe any additional taxes. However, the government contended that he had made substantial profits from these sales which were taxable as income. The main issue in this case was whether or not evidence obtained through an audit of Wyman's books could be used against him in court without violating his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. The Court held that such evidence could indeed be used because it was derived from records required to be kept under the Revenue Act of 1916. This decision established important precedent for future cases dealing with tax evasion and self-incrimination rights under the Fifth Amendment.

In the dissenting opinion for Wyman v. United States, Justice Holmes argued that the defendant's conviction should be upheld because he believed there was sufficient evidence to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. He disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the law and felt they were too lenient in their judgment. Holmes contended that even though some of the evidence may have been circumstantial, it still pointed towards Wyman's guilt and should not be dismissed simply because it wasn't direct proof. Furthermore, he asserted that if every piece of circumstantial evidence was disregarded by courts then many criminals would go free due to lack of direct proof which is often hard to come by in criminal cases. Therefore, according to him, this decision could potentially set a dangerous precedent for future cases.