ILNews

IBA: Online Protective Orders

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In the past, victims of domestic violence might find themselves standing in line at the clerk’s office waiting to file a petition, and in the midst of all the other public business happening there, would then have to explain intimate details about the situation to get the petition completed. This changed when Indiana launched its online system to petition for protection orders. For some time now those seeking assistance may do so in the security and privacy of an attorney’s or other advocate’s office while the petition is prepared and filed electronically. Only an original signature is needed on the papers filed with the court.

Because all protection orders in Indiana are to be filed electronically—as mandated in 2009 by the Indiana General Assembly—police officers and FBI agents in the field have access to the most current information about these orders. This includes identification of the protected party or parties, identification and description of the respondent, whether a firearm restriction was ordered, and other important details.

When an order of protection is granted, the petitioner is advised to keep a copy with them at all times. However, that may not always happen. Now that the information is available to law enforcement electronically, this means that if a protection order is filed in one county, and the petitioner travels to another county (or another state), or if it becomes necessary for them to seek police assistance, local officers can access the protection order information even if a copy is not readily available.

In addition to the courts and law enforcement having online access to protection order information, a protection order search is now available on the Indiana Supreme Court’s website. Information about the victim is not included in the online records, but information about the respondent and the order are. In addition, when filing a protection order, the petitioner can ask to be notified electronically—by text message and/or email—of events in the case, such as approval of the order by the court and service of the order on the respondent.

A full listing of advocates throughout Indiana may be found at the Indiana Supreme Court website, as well as more instructional information for clients.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT