In 2017, a New York mother asked a court to appoint a guardian for her adult son: someone authorized to make decisions about his money and personal care. Justin B. faced murder charges. He had been found unable to proceed with his criminal case and sent to a psychiatric hospital.
The prosecutor wanted to attend the guardianship hearing to gather evidence. The judge kept him out so Justin and his mother could speak freely without supplying information against him. One court was considering what help Justin needed to manage his life. The other concerned a life he was accused of taking.
Janice Chen spent years working on guardianship cases before becoming a judge. She emphasized the vulnerability of both the adult needing help and the family seeking it. Describing her work protecting vulnerable people, she said: “Serving as a judge will allow me to continue that mission on a larger scale.”
In August 2026, Larry Montes appeared before Chen, accused of attacking a congregant and security guard at Central Synagogue. Prosecutors said he struck a woman in the face, knocking her down, then spat at and headbutted the guard. They requested $50,000 cash bail, while Chen set it at $10,000.
For someone expecting criminal court to deliver punishment, the attention to the defendant’s needs and progress can be baffling. But courts deliberately took on this work. New York’s problem-solving movement brought treatment, counseling and job training into criminal justice. The promise was that helping defendants change their lives while staying out of jail would stop them committing more crimes.
For judges coming from guardianship work, helping “vulnerable people” retain their freedom was already part of the job. New York’s Article 81 sought to protect adults who needed help with money or personal care from having somebody else take over more of their lives than necessary.
But when the person being protected also harms others, the judge faces another question: how much control over his life is necessary to protect his victims?
Keeping an offender independent can mean asking other people to organize their lives around his behavior. The congregant has to consider whether attending services is safe; the guard has another confrontation to manage. A court can carefully weigh every restriction it places on the person before it. The restrictions he places on other people arrive without a hearing.