While I have not practiced in Indiana, I can discuss how similar proceedings are handled in Colorado where I have practiced in these kinds of hearings. I suspect that the process is similar in Indiana, but I don't know that to be the case. This is also a slight oversimplification that omits some subtle details and technicalities that apply in extraordinary cases.
Usually, there is first an ex parte hearing from a petitioner who claimed to need a protective order, at which the person to be restrained is not present, and a temporary protective order is issued if the judge hears the statement of the petitioner under oath and believe that a protection order is justified. The judge sets a hearing date and the temporary protective order is hand delivered by a process server upon the person to be restrained and takes effect at that time.
At a hearing on the hearing date, the Petitioner and Respondent can appear and present evidence over whether the order should be made permanent or at least continued for a specified period of time. If the Petitioner fails to appear, the case is usually dismissed. If the Respondent fails to appear, the order is usually made permanent without an additional evidentiary hearing.
My understanding is that, first, the petitioner testifies, presents
evidence and possibly calls witnesses, and, the respondent does the
Usually, the petitioner is allowed to present additional rebuttal evidence after the respondent's case, limited to the scope of the respondent's evidence.
Then each side can make closing arguments.
Sometimes, opening arguments from each side will precede the presentation of evidence by either party.
In theory, opening arguments simply outline what evidence will be presented. Closing arguments outline the evidence that was actually presented and apply it to the applicable law and on that basis ask the judge to reach a conclusion favorable to the party arguing.
Is the the entire process on the end of the petitioner and the
It isn't entirely clear what this means.
The Petitioner and the Respondent are the only parties that can present evidence or call witnesses (personally or through their lawyers) and the only parties that can make legal arguments (personally or through their lawyers).
No third-party government officials, other than the judge, are involved, although often a law enforcement officer, sometimes called a bailiff, is present at the courthouse or in the court room to intervene if violence or disorderly conduct breaks out during the hearing.
The judge evaluates the evidence and legal arguments presented by the parties but the judge can apply law to the case that neither party mentions or in a manner not suggested by either party.
Does the respondent have to testify? And do they have to answer
The Respondent does not have to testify. But if the Respondent does not testify, because this is a civil matter and not a criminal matter, the judge can hold a failure to testify against the Respondent.
Likewise, the Respondent can clam the Fifth Amendment if asked questions by the Petitioner or the Petitioner's lawyer or the judge, but if the Respondent does so, that can be held against the Respondent since it is a civil and not a criminal case.
If the Respondent does testify, the Respondent's testimony can be used against the Respondent in a later criminal trial if the Respondent's testimony helps prove that the Respondent committed a crime.
Does the evidence need to be admitted before the hearing?
Not usually (some courts have local rules requiring this that are usually disclosed in the papers served upon the respondent).
Usually, the admissibility of evidence is considered on a question by question basis with respect to questions asked of witnesses, and on a document by document, or physical object by physical object basis, with respect to evidence other than witness testimony that a party asks the judge to consider.
Objections can be raised to the admissibility of evidence based upon the rules of evidence, and the judge rules on each objection as it is made to the judge.
If an objection is not made when a question is asked or evidence is presented to the judge, the right to object to its admission is usually waived as a matter of law.
Can the respondent bring up evidence or make claims after the first
Once the hearing is over, the decision is made and no further evidence can be offered.
Any appeal will be limited to the evidence presented and legal arguments made in the hearing. New evidence cannot be presented in an appeal.
When does the respondent make a case for the impact of the orders
(rather than just the validity)?
Generally speaking, never. This is usually not a point that is legally relevant.
A respondent can argue in closing arguments that the scope of the order be narrowed for reasons supported by evidence offered in the hearing (e.g. arguing for permission to allow access to a home for the limited purpose of getting property or to change how far apart the petitioner and respondent will be to allow a path of access to a job site).
But the fact that a protective order has a severe negative impact on a respondent in and of itself, is not really a valid consideration.
How are subpoenas for evidence dealt with?
If a party has an attorney, the attorney can issue subpoenas directing people to show up at trial and/or to bring documents to trial, consistent with the relevant court rules on subpoenas in the relevant court. The subpoena has to be delivered in the proper manner on the person subject to it a certain number of days or hours before trial. If a subpoena is issued and served but the witness fails to appear, that may be grounds to issue an arrest warrant to the witness who has failed to appear and to postpone the hearing until the witness can appear.
If a party does not have an attorney, the party can prepare a draft subpoena on a court form, present it to the clerk of the court in question, who signs it, and then arrange to have a process server or deputy sheriff deliver the subpoena (for a fee). Otherwise, once it is properly delivered by the relevant deadline, the subpoena works just like one issued by an attorney.