State v. Smith held that a father's admissions of prior child abuse were admissible in a second degree murder case. Similarly, in Hill v. State, the court held that the State had introduced substantial circumstantial evidence of probative value that a manslaughter defendant had engaged in previous acts of injury to the child and that such evidence was admissible. In State v. Lawrence, the court held that the confinement of a child to the family's only residence (a 5-by-15-foot storage locker) could not be held as felonious unlawful imprisonment. State v. Maule, involving incest, examined the admissibility of expert testimony given by a sexual assault center worker. In Robey v. State, a mother was held not to be responsible by reason of insanity in the beating death of her infant, but was held responsible for her failure to seek treatment of an intermittent explosive disorder. Five cases (In re Frank W.D., In re Lambert, In re Ivette D., In re L.E.J., and In re Marcario), the State has attempted to interject itself into the parent-child relationship, usually in an effort to divest custody of the child from the parents. Issues addressed in these cases centered on evidence admissibility in child neglect and abuse cases, the use and admissibility of blood tests to establish paternity in a child sexual abuse case involving a stepfather, the use of a statutory inference of neglect in child custody proceedings, and grounds for probable cause in search warrant applications by child protective services. A final case, Harris v. City of Montgomery, dismissed a suit seeking damages for civil rights violations during the investigation and reporting of suspected child abuse and held that the reporting doctor, hospital, and others were protected against civil and criminal suit by the immunity provisions of the child abuse reporting statute. A total of 73 footnotes are provided.