Wilbert Brodie appealed his mortgage fraud conviction on ten grounds in five pro se (without counsel) filings. Additionally, the Federal Public Defender filed an amicus brief claiming that the district court committed three errors: (1) sustaining an objection to defense counsel's closing argument; (2) denying Brodie's new trial motion based on an alleged Brady violation; and (3) applying a four-point "leader or organizer" enhancement to Brodie's offense level under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. The amicus brief also asserts that Brodie's trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel because he failed to request a downward departure based on Brodie's immigration status. The Court of Appeals affirmed Brodie's conviction and sentence.

As previously reported by Mortgage Fraud Blog, pursuant to a second superseding grand jury indictment filed on August 12, 2004, Brodie was charged with four counts relating to a mortgage flipping scheme: one count of conspiracy to make false statements to financial institutions to obtain mortgage loans and to use wire transmissions in furtherance of a scheme to defraud and obtain money and property under false pretenses and three counts of wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 . The indictment also sought the forfeiture of $239,970.56. Two other participants in the scheme, Olurotimi Padonu and Sarafa Kareem, were charged with the same four counts as Brodie as well as an additional conspiracy count based on a separate fraud.

A jury found appellant Brodie guilty of conspiracy to make false statements to financial institutions to obtain mortgage loans and wire fraud. Brodie was sentenced to 57 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay $355,449.70 in restitution.