Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Edward Ramirez

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania criminal defense attorney represented the Defendant who was charged with murder and robbery.



Edward Ramirez was accused for robbing and murdering Joyce Dennis whose body was found in the back office of the Fabric Care Center laundromat in northeast Philadelphi1a where she work on February 20, 1995. He had been bludgeoned to death with an iron bar.



The police told William "Billy" Weihe, age 18, that if he did not implicate Ramirez in the murder he was go to prison for life.



Later a drug dealer1 named Corey Watkins told police that a Joseph Maio tolf him that Weihe had killed Dennis.



Melanie Foreman, another drug dealer, told police that Ramirez had told her that he committed the crime.



Weihe later told police that he saw Rammirez hid Dennis.



At trial Weihe testified that Ramirez robbed the laundromat and killed Dennis.



Ramirez did not testify.



Ken Otterbourg described the Ramirez miss-carriage of justice as follows:



"On February 20, 1995, police found Joyce Dennis's body in the back office of the Fabric Care Center laundromat where she worked in northeast Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.



Dennis was a newlywed, and her husband reported her missing when she didn't come home after her shift ended at 2 a.m. Police found blood throughout the laundromat—on the handle and door into the office, on the inside deadbolt of the back door, and the floor of the dry-cleaning room. The back door was unlocked, its deadbolt extended so that the door could not close. Police also found a blood-stained white fleece jacket liner and a torn men's black jacket with blood spots.



An autopsy later said that Dennis, who was 40 years old, had been hit in the head at least nine times. The police said that the murder weapon was a metal bar which was found inside the back office and, according to employees, had been there for years. Near the vending machines, the police found a wood-handled broom with blood stains.



Ernest Manger, the laundromat's owner, told police that there would normally be about $1,000 in paper currency at the business on a Sunday night. The office typically remained locked, he said, and the back door was locked around 8 p.m. Dennis normally locked the front door at around 12:30 a.m., but would let in customers during operating hours.



On February 24, police interviewed Jay Darnell, an employee at the laundromat, who lived across the street. Darnell said that on the night of the crime, he had been at his house with his wife, children, and some of his children's friends, including 18-year-old Edward Ramirez. He said that around 11 p.m., he sent his 20-year-old daughter, Mary Emmanuel, to get some milk and a soda. She returned between 11:15 and 11:30, and told her father that it was actually Ramirez who had gotten the soda, over at the laundromat.



"Mary said that Eddie had gone over to the laundromat to get my cream soda and he had seen Joyce and she was all right,” Darnell said.



At some later point, Ramirez and the other friends of his children left the house, Darnell said.



Police also interviewed Emmanuel on February 24. She confirmed that she had sent Ramirez to the laundromat to get a soda. She said he was gone for about 15 minutes and told her on his return that it had taken a while because he had flirted with a girl there named Joanna and gotten her telephone number. When they talked the next day, after Dennis's body had been found, Emmanuel asked Ramirez whether he had seen anything fishy at the laundromat. "He said 'No, just Joanna and some goofy blonde lady,' he said he guessed she worked there,” Emmanuel said.



Emmanuel said the other young men at her house on the night of February 19 were 18-year-old William "Billy” Weihe and Pete Gozzi.



Police interviewed Joanne Esquilin on March 6, and she confirmed Emmanuel's account of her encounter with Ramirez. (Separately, police later interviewed Ann Thompson, who said that Dennis helped her put her clothes in her car when she left the laundromat at 12:30 a.m. "I stayed until I saw that she locked the door,” Thompson said.)



Police interviewed Weihe on March 1, and he gave a statement implicating Ramirez in the robbery and murder. He then recanted that statement. A month later, on April 11, police interviewed Weihe a second time. Again, he implicated Ramirez and then recanted his statement.



On March 17, police picked up 15-year-old Sara Hurd and took her to police headquarters, known as the "Roundhouse,” and questioned her without an adult present. Hurd said that after the police first contacted her, she asked Ramirez about the murder, and he told her that he had simply gone over there to get a soda that night while Weihe waited outside. She was asked if Ramirez told her whether the laundromat was open or closed. "He didn't say, but if he got a soda, it had to be opened,” Hurd said. She would later say in an affidavit that the police screamed at her and threatened to take away her baby and to charge her with hiding evidence.



On March 20, police interviewed 15-year-old Luis Rivera. He said that about a week after the murder he was at Hurd's house when Ramirez showed up and asked him if he had heard about what happened. Rivera said he hadn't. According to Rivera's statement, Ramirez said that "him and Billy Weihe went to do a stickup and he (Eddie) hurt the lady and that the lady died.”



Police brought Hurd back in for questioning on March 22. This time, she was joined by an attorney from the public defender's office. Hurd said neither she nor Rivera ever heard a confession from Ramirez.



In October, a grand jury was empaneled to investigate the case. It heard from Gozzi, Emmanuel, and her two brothers. Gozzi said he drove Ramirez and Weihe from Parnell's house to Weihe's house about 1 a.m. Emmanuel testified that the police placed her and Weihe in the same room on February 28, and that Weihe told her the police had pressured him to make a false statement against Ramirez. "He said the police told him if he didn't ... tell them Eddie Ramirez's involvement in this he was going to go to jail for life, okay?” she testified.



The investigation appeared to stall until late April 1996, when police interviewed a drug dealer named Corey Watkins. He said that just after the murder, 17-year-old Joseph Maio told him that Weihe had said that "Billy killed the lady at the laundromat.” Watkins said he saw Weihe about two days later, when he tried to use a bunch of change to buy drugs. Watkins said he didn't hear anything about Ramirez being involved in the crime.



On May 1, 1996, the detectives re-interviewed Melanie Foreman, who was Watkins's girlfriend and also a drug dealer who knew many of the young people police had spoken with. Foreman had said in previous statements that she did not know anything about the murder, but on May 1, she was facing two state drug charges and three federal gun and drug charges.



Foreman said in the May 1 statement that Ramirez told her around three days after the murder that he committed the crime with Weihe and another young man named Thomas "T.A.” Dennis (no relation to Joyce Dennis). She said that Ramirez confessed while she, Dennis, Ramirez, and Hurd were smoking PCP in Hurd's basement. "He said that he got $250 from the lady, but that at first the lady didn't want to tell him where the money was,” Foreman said. "He said that he started hitting her, and she finally gave up the money. Eddie said that 'T.A.' stayed outside and Billy Weihe went into the laundromat to get a soda.” She said that Dennis later admitted to her that he served as the lookout.



Police had interviewed Joseph Maio in June 1995. He said then that he didn't know anything about Dennis's death and that he and T.A. had been hanging out with Ramirez and Weihe earlier in the evening on the night of the crime. He said they split up after a transportation snafu, and Maio didn't see them the rest of the night.



On June 19, 1996, police re-interviewed Maio. In this statement, he said that he was at Hurd's on the night of February 19, no later than 11:30, when Weihe and Ramirez showed up and told him what had happened at the laundromat.



"When they got to Sara's house,” Maio said. "I was in the kitchen with Sara. Eddie, Billy and 'T.A.' walked in together, and Eddie patted his pants pockets. Both of his pockets were loaded with change. You could hear all the change as he walked. Eddie said, 'Look what I got.' He told me and Sara that 'We stopped at the laundromat, we just got paid.'”



T.A. was never charged. His statements to police tracked Maio's earlier statement; they lost track of Weihe and Ramirez early in the evening and never went to Hurd's that night.



A young woman named Kristina Smith told police on June 27, 1996, that she was at the party at Hurd's house and heard that Ramirez, Maio, T.A., and Joseph McDevitt Jr. had committed the robbery. The police interviewed McDevitt a week later, on July 2, 1996, confronting him with Smith's statement. McDevitt said in a statement that he had been at Hurd's house, looking to sell some marijuana, when Ramirez, Weihe, and Dennis arrived. He overheard them in the kitchen, talking to Maio about how they had to kill some woman and had "just got paid.”



Police brought Weihe in for questioning on July 3. Now, the detectives read Weihe his Miranda rights, and he gave a statement that said Ramirez robbed the laundromat and had Weihe serve as a lookout. Weihe said that the door was open, as Ramirez walked right in. He said he saw Ramirez hit Dennis in the head with something after she refused to give him the money. After the robbery, Weihe said, they went to Hurd's house and bought drugs. Weihe said Ramirez's pants were weighed down from all the coins he had stolen from the laundromat.



Weihe was arrested later that day, and Ramirez was arrested July 4, 1996. Both were charged with murder, robbery, and criminal conspiracy.



Ramirez's jury trial in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, presided over by Judge Paul Latrone, began in December 1997. Weihe had agreed to testify against Ramirez and would be allowed to plead guilty to third-degree murder. Jack McMahon represented Ramirez.



At trial, Manger testified about the laundromat's operations. He said the attendants didn't handle a lot of coins; customers got quarters from change machines on the wall. Those machines weren't damaged, he said, and the money stolen from Dennis was paper currency.



Weihe testified that Ramirez robbed the laundromat and beat Dennis to death. He said Ramirez first broached the idea a few hours after they had gone to the laundromat to buy Darnell a soda. Weihe said that Ramirez left the laundromat after the robbery through the front door and that he could hear all the loose change jingling in his pockets. He also said there was a spot of blood on one of Ramirez's boots.



Weihe's testimony was at odds with other testimony and evidence. First, he said that Ramirez entered the building without knocking. Second, Weihe said Ramirez never entered the back office of the laundromat where the pipe used to kill Dennis had been kept. He testified that Ramirez beat Weihe with a shorter, black stick and didn't use the broom. Third, he testified that Ramirez didn't use the back door, which was unlocked and had blood on the handle. He also testified that Ramirez was loaded down with coins from the robbery, which was at odds with the owner's testimony about how cash was handled at the business.



Maio also testified that Ramirez's pockets were so heavy with change that you could hear the money as he walked. Maio testified that he heard Ramirez say that he and Weihe decided to rob the laundromat after they went in there to buy a soda and saw Joyce Dennis with bags of money. Maio also said that Ramirez and Weihe arrived at Hurd's house before midnight.



Foreman testified that Ramirez admitted his involvement in the robbery-murder the next day, after she asked him if "he robbed the lady.” This differed from her statement, which said that Ramirez confessed to her a week after the murder. After trial, Ramirez's defense learned that Foreman was cooperating with the federal government on other cases when she gave her initial statement against Ramirez. Rivera testified that he heard Ramirez confess to the crime at Hurd's house.



Detective William Gross testified about the crime scene, including the location of blood in the office. He said there was no blood in the main laundry area, although blood was found on the metal pipe and the fleece liner. Gross testified that the back door needed a key to lock and unlock and that Dennis's keys were never found. He also testified that Dennis's cleaning supplies were out, suggesting that she had begun her closing procedures at the end of her shift.



Dr. Gregory McDonald, an assistant medical examiner, testified that Dennis had received at least nine blows to her head. She also had defensive wounds on her left hand and facial injuries consistent with being punched. McDonald testified that Dennis's time of death was likely between 11:30 p.m. and 2:30 a.m. He said that the extent of Dennis's wounds did not necessarily mean that her assailant would be covered in blood.



Ramirez did not testify. A young woman named Brooke Williams testified that she was at Hurd's house on the night of the murder and no party took place. Hurd also testified that the party at her house was the night before, and that she never heard Ramirez say he had anything to do with the crime.



Although Hurd testified that the police pressured her to make a statement against Ramirez, she was not asked for details about the tactics she would later say the police used.



Darnell testified that Ramirez and his friends left his house about 1 a.m. on the morning of February 20. He also said that it was standard practice to lock the front door to the laundromat late at night.



Edward Ramirez Sr., a retired Philadelphia police officer, testified that he had given his son permission to spend the night at the Darnell residence on February 19. He said Eddie came home the next day wearing the same clothes. A few days later, when he learned the police wanted to speak to his son, he examined his clothes and boots, looking for blood. He testified that he found none.



In closing arguments, McMahon said there was no physical evidence—including fingerprints collected at the crime scene—connecting Ramirez to the crime. He also said the state's witnesses were unreliable and its timeline of events didn't make sense.



The prosecutor said Weihe and the other witnesses were credible. The idea that Dennis's assailant would have been covered with blood was "movie talk,” he said. He also said it was "common sense” that large amounts of change were kept at the laundromat.



At trial, Weihe had testified that after he and Ramirez were arrested, the police placed them in the same cell. Ramirez did not confront his accuser. The prosecutor said in his closing argument that this silence was telling.



"In the law, there is something called tacit admission,” the prosecutor said. "An admission is what Weihe did on himself, [he] spoke, he put it on himself and he said he wanted to tell. Sometimes not speaking when you should speak is as much of an admission when someone accuses you of doing something that you didn't do. You don't even defend yourself. Like when my wife came in and said, 'Did you eat the last piece of cake,' and I know I did, I don't bother to deny it because my tacit admission, my silence definitely says everything.”



McMahon did not object, but Judge Latrone ordered the jury to disregard that statement. "The concept of tacit admission in criminal law is not an acceptable one,” he said.



In addition, the prosecutor said that Ramirez and his family should have cooperated with the investigation and given the police evidence to help clear Ramirez. McMahon objected, and Judge Latrone told the jury that Ramirez had no duty to present evidence.



The jury began deliberations on December 30, 1997 and delivered its verdict on January 2, 1998. Although Ramirez had been charged with first-degree murder, the jury convicted him of second-degree murder, robbery, and conspiracy. He was later sentenced to life in prison.



Weihe received a sentence of five to 15 years in prison."



The Philadelphia District Attorney's Office issued the following press release:



?Following is a statement prepared by Assistant District Attorney David Napiorski of the DA's Law Division Federal Litigation Unit as well as District Attorney Larry Krasner for a hearing before the Court of Common Pleas, which on Thursday granted the DAO's motion to nolle pros all charges against Edward "Eddie” Ramirez (DOB: 11/10/1976), whose conviction for a 1995 murder was vacated by the court earlier this month:



"In 1998, Eddie Ramirez was convicted of 2nd Degree Murder for the killing of Joyce Dennis in the back room of a laundromat in 1995. No physical evidence was tied to any suspect, and the Commonwealth's case at trial relied on cooperating co-defendant William Weihe and three other teenagers who alleged they overheard Ramirez speak about the murder. Ramirez argued he was not present and was not involved in the murder, though at the time those arguments had little corroboration.



"For more than 25 years, however, the Commonwealth withheld substantial evidence that supported Ramirez's trial defense. Despite the existence of this evidence, prior DA administrations presented argument to the trial court as well as various post-conviction courts that was either directly refuted or called into question by the withheld evidence. It was not until District Attorney Larry Krasner took office that withheld evidence was provided to Ramirez as part of his Post Conviction Relief Act litigation.



"The failure by prior DAs to disclose this evidence to Ramirez – which he had always been entitled to under the U.S. Constitution – was unacceptable and outrageous. As a representative of the institution, I believe the Philadelphia DA's Office should be accountable for its errors and misconduct, including that of long-gone prosecutors and prior elected DAs. On behalf of the DAO, I apologize to the Court, to the victim's family, and to Mr. Ramirez and his family for the effect that past violations of his rights had on this case and on everyone involved.



"Additionally, though prior administrations unacceptably fought the testing, DNA testing was more recently performed on a number of items related to this investigation: underneath the victim's fingernails, the murder weapon, and a fleece vest used to wipe down the murder weapon. DNA was recovered and tested. Mr. Ramirez was excluded as a contributor to the male DNA found on all three of these items.



"It is against this backdrop that we moved today to withdraw all criminal charges against Mr. Ramirez. We are pleased that the Court agreed.”"



See:





See:

In re: Ramirez

Ramirez was found guilty of second-degree murder, robbery, and conspiracy.



His conviction was affirmed by the Superior Court of Pennsylvania on August 30, 2011.



Ramirez then filed a writ of habeas corpus with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on October 3, 2012. His petition was denied.



The Pennsylvania Innocence Project the stepped in to represent Ramirez



Another petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed, which included recantations from Rivera, McDevitt, Watkins and Foreman.



On November 2, 2023, Judge Scott DiClaudio granted Ramirez a new trial.



On November 20, 2023, the State of Pennsylvania dismissed the charges against Ramirez.



Ramirez was in prison for 25 years for crime he did not commit.