CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Hyde v. United States

1912 United States Supreme Court case

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionApr 27, 2026
Entity authorityQ19055903 ↗
Source-derived summary

Hyde v. United States, 225 U.S. 347 (1912), is a United States Supreme Court criminal case interpreting attempt. The court held that for an act to be a criminal attempt, it must be so near the result that the danger of its success must be very large. The case is notable for Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes's formulation in the dissent that attempt is present when a defendant's conduct bears "a dangerous proximity to success."

References

External links

Text of Hyde v.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Hyde v. United States” as 1912 United States Supreme Court case. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1912—that can be checked directly. The linked authority record independently contributes the date 1997-05-27. The account is most persuasive where Hyde, United and States can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as 1912 United States Supreme Court case. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 27, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q19055903. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1912.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Hyde v. United States”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Hyde v. United States primary sources, Hyde v. United States archive and Hyde research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Hyde v. United States”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Hyde v. United States” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.