May 10, 2024 By Mike Jones 6 min read

Kimberly Furmanek violated at least one of the rules of professional conduct as an attorney when she became romantically involved with a Washington County jail inmate whom she was representing, and later was accused of allowing him to listen in on what was supposed to be a private phone conversation she had with his new lawyer.

The panel that reports to the state Disciplinary Board made that recommendation Thursday afternoon following two days of hearings, including nearly four hours of testimony by Furmanek in which she admitted to becoming romantically involved with inmate John Lazear several months after she was assigned to represent him.

The Greene County lawyer said she had known Lazear since she was in high school, and they had an “on-again, off-again” relationship years earlier before that rekindled in the months after she began representing him as conflict counsel attorney in multiple drug cases in late 2020. Furmanek, 36, of Richhill Township, admitted that they hugged and kissed during a “contact visit” on Nov. 18, 2021, which was captured on surveillance video and initiated her eventual termination as conflict counsel in Washington County.

“He initiated the contact,” Furmanek said. “Should I have pulled away or stopped it? Yes. It was just a quick thing. It was nothing more than a goodbye hug and kiss from someone who I had a long relationship with. I don’t think that’s a sexual relationship. Looking back now, I should’ve reacted differently.”

But attorney LaTammie Bivins of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, which filed the petition against Furmanek bringing her law license under review, noted that the video showed a lack of judgment since it violated jail policies and could have affected her performance as an attorney.

“You knew that was a violation of the (jail) policy,” Bivins said. “As a seasoned attorney, you would know not to have that kind of contact with a client.”

Furmanek disagreed, saying she was able to “separate my professional relationship and my romantic relationship” with Lazear while representing him. However, after she was terminated as conflict counsel on Dec. 7, 2021, she continued to contact Lazear repeatedly and attempted to represent him despite being fired as a county employee. Less than five months later, she and Lazear were accused of conspiring to have the inmate eavesdrop on a private phone call Furmanek had with Washington lawyer Jim Jeffries, who was assigned as the new attorney on the case.

“You were led by your personal feelings to Mr. Lazear when you made that phone call to Mr. Jeffries,” Bivins said.

“No, I was upset (Jeffries) didn’t show up for court (and Lazear’s) case was being delayed. I would’ve done that for any other client,” Furmanek said.

“You knew Mr. Lazear was listening in on the call,” Bivins responded. “You knew he was listening because you told him to keep his mouth shut. You were no longer the attorney of record. You were Johnny’s girlfriend. You were making calls on his behalf as his girlfriend.”

Because the phone line to Lazear in the jail was recorded, Furmanek was charged with wiretapping since Jeffries did not know the May 6, 2022, call was taped and could be used against his client in court. Furmanek pleaded guilty in August to two misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct and was sentenced to serve 12 months of probation and undergo drug and alcohol treatment.

“I asked to be placed in treatment because I knew if I didn’t, I wouldn’t get the plea offer,” Furmanek said.

While Furmanek claimed that she took an independent drug test just before her termination that came back negative, she also admitted to the Disciplinary Board to drug use up until 2022, which led to the assessment for drug and alcohol treatment.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel initiated the petition against Furmanek in November with this week’s proceedings likely leading to sanctions against her. After the panel decided Furmanek violated at least one rule of professional conduct, the process moved into a new phase with witnesses offering aggravating and mitigating testimony to determine the sanctions.

Maj. David Coddington, who handles security at the Washington County jail, said another inmate from Greene County was transferred to their facility for unknown reasons, but phone conversations between him and Furmanek last month revealed they had a romantic interest in each other. Coddington testified to show aggravating circumstances, which appeared to display a pattern of behavior by Furmanek.

“We’ve already been down that road before and we didn’t want to go down it again, ” Coddington said of the decision to move that inmate to a different jail.

Greene County Public Defender Harry Cancelmi testified on Furmanek’s behalf about her performance during the time she worked in his office. He added that she performed community service hours to volunteer as an attorney in his office following her guilty plea.

“You’ve always been a good lawyer, a good defender when you worked in the office,” Cancelmi said. “I have nothing but good things to say about your abilities as a lawyer and I’ve never had any reason to doubt your character.”

At the end of the hearing, Furmanek and Bivins briefly addressed the panel.

“These last nine years I’ve been practicing, I try to treat all of my clients like they’re human, and maybe I’ve done too much,” Furmanek said.

She said she did not believe she violated all the rules of professional conduct she’s been charged with, “but if I have violated them, I’m sorry.”

“I can strive to do better, and I hope I am given that chance,” she said.

Bivins contended she proved each allegation.

“Miss Furmanek engaged in deceit and dishonesty. She knew there was a problem with that relationship, and that’s why she lied when her employer asked her,” Bivins said.

She asked the board to recommend a suspension of one year and one day.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel has 20 days to file a brief after receipt of the hearing transcript, while Furmanek has 20 days after they file their brief.

The panel, which did not detail which rule or rules Furmanek violated, will submit its report to the state Disciplinary Board, which has 60 days to issue its final order after Furmanek files.

Managing editor Jennifer Garofalo contributed to this report.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This story has been updated to correctly identify the three-member board during this week’s proceedings as a hearing panel that makes a recommendation to the state Disciplinary Board, which will make the ultimate determination.