United States v. Wilkozek, No. 15-1537 (7th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseIn 2003 Wilkozek pleaded guilty mail fraud for participation in a mortgage-fraud scheme. Wilkozek drafted and submitted phony mortgage applications for buyers (participants in the scheme) to purchase properties from realtors (also participants) at artificially high prices. Mortgage lenders approved them and distributed the funds to the buyers, who divided the funds among the participants and abandoned the underwater properties. As Wilkozek expected, the original lenders quickly sold the mortgages to third-party lenders on the strength of the applications. By the time the third-party lenders uncovered the scheme, all they could do was foreclose and sell the properties. They suffered losses of more than $700,000. Wilkozek was ordered to pay restitution to the third-party lenders. The government asked the judge to order garnishment of Wilozek’s wages. Wilkozek challenged the request by petition for coram nobis—an ancient writ used to collaterally attack a criminal judgment. Wilkozek claimed to have “new evidence,” proving the third-party lenders were not actually victims entitled to restitution and that the government miscalculated the amount of unpaid restitution. The judge entered the order. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. Misclassifying a lender as a victim is not a fundamental error remediable by coram nobis, and even if it were, Wilkozek was not close to proving misclassification.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.