Harvard Law Review 63 (1950).

Excerpt:

A prior conflict among the circuit courts over whether to enter judgment of guilty on one count pursuant to a verdict which is necessarily inconsistent with a verdict of not guilty on another count was settled in 1932 by Dunn v. United States. The Supreme Court through Justice Holmes held that the verdicts should stand despite the logical impossibility they embody. The problem, one of wide implications in the administration of justice, has its setting in the body of rules which establish a division of functions between judge and jury.

Online:
Yale Law School