| Litigants: | Hyde v. United States |
| Arguedatea: | October 23 |
| Arguedateb: | 24 |
| Argueyear: | 1911 |
| Rearguedate: | May 3 |
| Reargueyear: | 1912 |
| Decidedate: | June 10 |
| Decideyear: | 1912 |
| Fullname: | Hyde and Schneider v. United States |
| Usvol: | 225 |
| Uspage: | 347 |
| Parallelcitations: | 32 S. Ct. 793; 56 L. Ed. 1114 |
| Majority: | McKenna |
| Joinmajority: | White, Day, Devanter, Pitney |
| Dissent: | Holmes |
| Joindissent: | Lurton, Hughes, Lamar |
Hyde v. United States, 225 U.S. 347 (1912), is a United States Supreme Court criminal case interpreting attempt.[1] 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.[1] 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."[2]