Awojobi conducted an auction sale at the Prince George's County Courthouse on May 30, 2006. In the following year, settlement on the property took place at his law office. The sale was audited in June 2007 and later ratified in that same month.

When Awojobi failed to distribute proceeds, the parties to the sale, through their respective counsel, filed a Joint Motion To Distribute Settlement Proceeds. The Circuit Court for Prince George's County ordered Awojobi to distribute over $40,000 to each of the parties. Awojobi failed to distribute funds to Shawn T. Johnson. Through the remainder of 2007, counsel for Mr. Johnson engaged in multiple discussions with Awojobi regarding the settlement proceeds. After nearly four months of discussions, counsel for Mr. Johnson finally filed a complaint with the Attorney Grievance Commission and advised that Awojobi had failed to distribute funds due to his client. There is no evidence that Mr. Johnson ever received his share of the funds, nor was there evidence that Awojobi took any remedial actions.

The Attorney Grievance case was referred to the Honorable Thomas P. Smith, of the Circuit Court for Prince George's County. Judge Smith concluded that Awojobi's conduct violated MARYLAND RULE OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 8.4. In particular, RULE 8.4 provides:

It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
. . .
(b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;
(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

Furthermore, Judge Smith found that Awojobi's conduct constituted acts of theft in violation of MD. CODE ANN., CRIM. § 7-104(a) because Awojobi had taken Mr. Johnson's money and used it for his own purposes.

Awojobi was absent from this hearing and offered nothing to contravene these findings of facts. Since that trial court hearing, he has not presented any evidence of remedial measures or mitigating circumstances. Pursuant to MD. RULE 16-759, the Court of Appeals of Maryland treated the trial judge's findings of facts as established.

The Honorable Chief Judge Robert M. Bell, writing for the Court of Appeals, noted that the default sanction for an ethical violation involving intentional misappropriation or intentional dishonest conduct is disbarment. Only in events demonstrating extenuating circumstance will the Court excuse it or apply a lesser sanction. Considering that Awojobi failed to even appear at his own hearing at the trial court level, the Court found no extenuating circumstances found here. The Court of Appeals affirmed the finding of disbarment for Awojobi.