Whether the State of Maryland violated Petitioner's 14th Amendment due process rights

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the State of Maryland violated Petitioner’s 14th Amendment due process rights in an attorney disciplinary proceeding resulting in Petitioner's disbarment where, contrary to this Court’s holding in In re Ruffalo, 390 U.S. 544, 550-51 (1961), the State charged Petitioner with violations of law on one basis but, after the trial, the State found Petitioner guilty of violations of law on another basis on which it had never charged Petitioner. 2. Whether the State of Maryland violated Petitioner’s 14th Amendment due process rights in an attorney disciplinary proceeding resulting in Petitioner's disbarment where, contrary to this Court’s holding in Willner v. Comm. on Character & Fitness, 373 U.S. 96, 103 (1963), the prosecutor withheld tens to hundreds of pages of potentially exculpatory and mitigating documents that were necessary for Petitioner to prepare his defense and cross-examination of the sole prosecution witness, and whether the disclosure rule this Court enunciated in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963) applies in attorney disciplinary cases, which are quasi-criminal. ii PARTIES INVOLVED The style of the case identifies the parties involved. Petitioner Andrew Ndubisi Ucheomumu is an individual Maryland resident who is an attorney formerly licensed to practice law in Maryland. Respondent Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland is an administrative agency in the judicial branch of Maryland State Government, which receives, investigates, and where indicated, prosecutes complaints for professional misconduct and incapacity against Maryland attorneys.