NCPOFFC NEWSLETTER * 10th Edition, December 2014


CONTACT US!  

NCPOFFC 
1901 N. Fort Myer Drive 
Suite 1011 
Arlington, VA 22209 

(800) 903-0111, prompt 2
(703) 312-7922 
(703)  312-7966 (fax)

  

Email 

  

Please "friend", "follow" & "like" us on our social networks!

 

 
Inter-jurisdictional Enforcement of Mutual Protection Orders
Monica N. Player, Attorney Advisor 

 

 

Mutual protection orders can be very difficult to enforce. A mutual protection order is a single order that includes prohibitions against both the petitioner and respondent. Survivor safety and offender accountability can be enhanced when system actors have a greater understanding of how mutual protection orders are enforced. There are federal and state laws which address the many challenges that courts and law enforcement face in issuing and enforcing these orders.

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) addresses mutual protection orders and restricts the issuance and enforcement of these orders in two ways. First, the full faith and credit provision provides that a mutual protection order is only entitled to inter-jurisdictional enforcement against the respondent and not the petitioner. This is true unless the respondent cross-files a separate written pleading, complaint, or petition for a protection order. If this is the case, the issuing court must make a finding that both parties are entitled to a protection order. Absent a separate petition and finding, the provisions in the order restricting the petitioner are not entitled to enforcement across jurisdictional lines. (18 U.S.C. �2265).

Second, VAWA strongly discourages the issuance of mutual orders in jurisdictions that receive funding from the Grants to Encourage Arrest and Protection Order Enforcement Program. These jurisdictions must certify that their laws, policies, and practices prohibit the issuance of mutual protection orders except under limited circumstances. Both parties must file a petition and the court must make a finding of fact that each person acted as aggressors and neither party acted in self-defense to comply with the grant certification requirements. (42 U.S.C. �3796hh (c) (1) (C)).

Enforcing mutual orders of protection can be very challenging. Practitioners must distinguish mutual protection orders from situations where the court issues each party a separate order and each are afforded due process. In the case of mutual protection orders, the petitioner is not afforded an opportunity to respond. Survivors are often left with prohibitions on their conduct and the batterer has a feeling of empowerment. For these reasons, the issuance of mutual protection orders is strongly discouraged.

Tips for Attorneys and Advocates

Practitioners should consider the following steps when an abuser attempts to obtain a mutual protection order based on a petition filed by the petitioner:
  • Argue against the issuance of a mutual order where the court did not make a finding that both parties were eligible for relief. 
  • Dispute the issuance of a mutual protection order where the respondent has not cross-filed a separate written pleading, complaint, or petition for relief. 
  • Help the survivor file a cross-petition, in circumstances where their abuser filed a petition first, so the court can make a finding that the survivor is entitled to relief and issue a cross-order of protection. 
  • Remind the court that the original petitioner should receive reasonable notice and an opportunity to respond appropriately to any request for relief made by the respondent. 
  • Assist the survivor in appealing the issuance of the order, if appropriate. 
  • Explain to the survivor the possible ramifications to consenting to a mutual protection order including the punishment for violation.
  • Caution the survivor when entering into a mutual consent decree or stipulated agreement in lieu of a protection order. These agreements may contain terms that affect the rights and obligations of both parties.
Tips for Law Enforcement

The following tips provide guidance to officers when encountering violations of a mutual protection order:

  • Review the order. If the order is from your jurisdiction, it is enforceable against both parties. 
  • Examine the mutual protection order from the out-of-state jurisdiction to determine if it includes information on a cross-petition and findings against both parties. If the order does not provide sufficient information, interview the petitioner and respondent to determine if they both filed separate petitions and the court made a finding that each party was eligible for relief. 
  • Seek additional information from the issuing court if the facts are not apparent prior to enforcing a mutual protection order.
  • Enforce out-of-state mutual protection orders against petitioners only when you make a determination that the order complies with the full faith and credit provision. 
Resources: State Statutes Addressing Mutual Protection Orders

Forty-two states have protection order statutes that address the issuance of mutual protection orders. Similar to VAWA many states require each party to file a separate petition and for the court to make specific findings that each party is eligible for a protection order to enforce a mutual protection order from another jurisdiction. A matrix containing the statutory summaries of states addressing mutual orders can be found here.

If you have questions or need assistance with a mutual protection order, please contact us at 1-800-903-0111, prompt 2, or visit our website at www.fullfaithandcredit.org.
Article Title


This project is supported by Grant No. 2011-TA-AX-K080 awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.