This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Delvental, who stood at the teller's window holding a pistol was identified by virtue of a hidden camera. He pleaded guilty to the robbery, and to a repeat performance at the same bank three weeks later. He was sentenced shortly before the trial to ten years imprisonment for each crime, to be served concurrently. Delvental then testified that while he held up the teller, Plante (D) stood inside the door, holding a shotgun. A teller, confirmed this testimony, and identified D. Iannaco, the mastermind of both robberies, also pleaded guilty, and received twelve years. Iannaco testified for stating that a man named Steve, rather than D, was the other man in the bank. D did not testify but it was brought to the jury's attention that he had been in jail before his present arrest. Delvental volunteered that D had a criminal record. The court, on request, ordered this stricken and instructed the jury to disregard it. Delvental was also asked how long he had known D and answered that D was in jail at the time. D moved for a mistrial, and the court denied it. D also complained that on cross-examination of Iannaco the government brought out that he had been in Lynn, Massachusetts, 'overnight' (which clearly meant in the Lynn jail) with D three weeks before the robbery, and that his first meeting with D had been in a state prison institution eight months prior to that. D was convicted and appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.