Rel: 11/21/2014

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter . Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions , Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-37 4 1 ((334) 229-0649), of any typographic a l or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter
. 

# SUPRE ME CO URT O F ALA BAMA

OCTO BER T ERM, 2014- 2015

_____ _____ _____ _____ _____ 11303 88

_____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Houst on Co unty Econo mic D evelo pmentAuth ority

v. State of A labam a Appea l fro m Hou ston Circu it Co urt

(CV-1 2-900 266) PER C URIAM . The Houst on Count y Econo mic Devel opmen t Autho rity ("HED A") appea ls from a judgm ent c o n d e mning 691 alleg edly illeg al gambl ing devic es, $288, 657.6 8 in cash , a nd vario us docum ents alleg edly relat ed to ille gal g ambli ng. We af firm.11303 88 I. F acts and P roced ural Histo ry

On July 25, 2012, offic ers from the H o u s ton Count y Sheri ff's Offic e, the Alaba ma Depar tment of Publi c Safet y, and the O ffice of t he Al abama Atto rney Gener al ex ecute d a s earch

warra nt at a bingo gami n g f a c i lity known as Cente r Stage Alaba ma ("Cen ter Stage ") locat ed in Houst o n C o unty. As a resul t of the searc h, the State of Alaba ma confi scate d 6 91 alleg edly illeg al gambl ing devic es, which inclu ded elect ronic

gamin g dev ices, comp uter serve rs, a nd ga ming table s use d for

a roule tte-s tyle game calle d "Roub ingo" ; $288, 657.6 8 in Unite d State s curre ncy; and vario us docum ents alleg edl y relat ed to illeg al gambl ing. On July 26, 2012, the St a t e insti tuted a civil -forf eitur e proce eding in the Houst on Circu it Court under the provi sions of § 13A-1 2-30, Ala. C o d e 1 975, seeki ng forfe iture of the items and curre ncy seize d durin g the July 25

searc h of Cente r Sta ge. On April 16, 20 1 3 , HEDA sough t, and was grant ed, the right to inter vene in the forfe i t u r e actio n. HEDA is the opera tor of Cente r Stage . The elect ronic -gami ng devic es used 1

HEDA lease s the facil ity p remis es from Cente r Stage 1 Alaba ma, Inc. Cente r Stage Alaba ma, Inc., was initi ally named as a defen dant in the forfe iture actio n, but it was dismi ssed on the groun d that it had no inter est in the seize d prope rty. 211303 88

in the opera tion of Cente r Stage were lease d by HEDA from each gamin g devic e's respe ctive manuf actur er or devel oper. H E D A 2
purpo rtedl y opera ted Cente r Stage under a "Clas s C Sp e cial Permi t to Opera te Bi ngo G ames" gran ted b y the Hous ton C ounty Commi ssion to o perat e cha ritab le bi ngo g ames under Amen dment No. 569 to the Alaba ma Const ituti on of 1901. In addit ion to 3 offer ing elect ronic gamin g and Roubi ngo, Cente r Stage a l so offer ed tr aditi onal "pape r bin go," live enter tainm ent, and a bar.
A bench trial was condu cted begin ning on Augus t 7, 2013. Over three days, the trial court heard live testi mony f r om law-e nforc ement perso nnel w h o h ad parti cipat ed in the inves tigat ion and searc h of Cente r Stag e . The testi mony of

sever al witne sses was recei ved via s ubmis sion of depos ition

Tw o o f the devel opers , Baron Ameri ca, LLC, and Selec t 2 Elect ronic Devel opmen t, Inc. ("SED "), inter vened in the forfe iture actio n, each asser ting owner ship of so m e of the equip ment seize d fro m Cen ter S tage. Bef ore t rial both Baron Ameri ca a n d S E D filed forma l notic e with the trial court relin quish ing their claim s t o any of the seize d prope rty. Neith er Baron Ameri ca nor SED parti cipat ed in the t r ial of this matte r, an d the y are not parti es to this appe al. Amend m e n t No. 569 was propo sed by Act No. 94-60 6, Ala. 3 Acts 1994, p. 1120, submi tted at the Novem ber 8, 1994, gener al elect ion, and procl aimed ratif ied Janua ry 6, 1995. See Local Amend ment, Houst on Count y, § 1 , A l a. Const . 1901 (Off. Recom p.). 311303 88

trans cript s; one of those witne sses was HEDA' s exper t witne ss, who gener ally testi fied that the elect ronic -gami ng de v i c es seize d by the S tate opera ted i n suc h a w ay as to c omply with the defin ition of "bing o" as defin ed by this Court in previ ous

cases discu ssed infra
. The parti es also offer ed into evide nce

over 50 exhib its, inclu ding video of game play at Cente r Stage taken by an under cover offic er. Fo llowi ng the close of evide nce, the p artie s sub mitte d pos ttria l bri efs. On Octob er 17, 2013, the trial court enter ed an order and final judg ment. The tria l cou rt co nclud ed th at th e dev ices, inclu ding the elect ronic dev ices, compu ter serve rs, and Roubi ngo table s, const itute d illeg al gambl i n g devic es. The trial court furth er concl uded that the Unite d State s curre ncy and other seize d "gamb ling parap her nalia " was being used in

conne ction with the illeg al gambl ing opera tion. The t rial court orde red t hat " the g ambli ng de vices
... be de stroy ed or other wise dispo sed of by the State of Alaba ma" and order ed the State to depos it the seize d curre ncy into the State 's Gener al Fund. The trial court denie d HEDA' s postj udgme nt motio n, and
HEDA timel y app ealed .

411303 88 II. Stand ard o f Rev iew

The trial court issue d its judgm ent fol l o wing a bench trial at w hich evide nce w as pr esent ed or e ten us.

" Our ore tenus stand ard of revie w is well settl ed . '"Whe n a judge in a nonju ry case he ars oral testi mony, a judgm ent based on findi ngs of fact based on that testi mony will be presu med corre ct and will not be d i s t u rbed on appea l excep t for a plain and palpa ble error ."' Smith v. Muchi a, 85 4 So. 2d 85, 92 (Ala. 2003) (quot ing Allst ate Ins. Co. v. Skelt on, 6 75 So . 2d 377, 379 ( Ala. 1996) ). "'"Th e ore tenus rule is groun ded upon the princ iple that when the t r i al court hears oral testi mony it h a s an oppor tunit y to evalu ate the demea nor and credi bilit y of witne sses. " Hall v. Mazzo n e , 486 So. 2d 408, 410 (Ala. 1986)
. The rule appli es to "disp uted issue s of fact, " wheth er the dispu te is based entir ely upon oral testi mony or u p on a combi natio n of oral testi mony and docum entar y evide nce. Born v. Clark , 662 So. 2d 669, 672 (Ala. 1995)
. The ore tenus stand ard of revie w, succi nctly stat ed, i s as follo ws: "'"[W ]here the evide nce has been [pres ented ] ore tenus , a p r e s u m p t i o n o f corr e c t n e s s atten ds the tri al court 's concl usion on issue s of fact, and this Court will not distu rb the trial court 's c onclu sion unles s it is clear ly erro neous and again st the great weigh t of the evide nce, but will affir m t he judgm ent if, under any reaso nable aspec t, it is suppo rted by credi ble e viden ce."'

511303 88

"Reed v. Board of Trs. for Alabam a State Univ. , 778 So. 2d 791, 795 (Ala. 2000) (quot ing Raidt v. Crane , 3 4 2 So. 2d 358, 360 (Ala. 1977) ). Howev er, ' t h a t presu mptio n [of corre ctnes s] has no appli catio n when the trial court is shown to have impro perly appli ed the law to the facts .' Ex parte Board of Zonin g Adjus tment of Mobil e, 636 So. 2 d 4 15, 417 (Ala. 1994) ." Kenne dy v. Boles Invs. , Inc., 53 So. 3d 60, 67-68 (Ala. 2010)
. III. Anal ysis
HEDA raise s a numbe r of issue s on appea l. First , HEDA conte nds that the langu age of the const ituti onal amen d m e nt permi tting bing o in Houst on Co unty, the relat ed im pleme nting statu te, a nd th e cou nty b ingo resol ution exem pt th e pro perty in this case from seizu r e and forfe iture under Alaba ma's gener al antig ambli ng laws, inclu ding § 13A-1 2-30. Se c o n d,
HEDA argue s tha t a b ond-v alida tion proce eding rela ted t o the const ructi on and devel opmen t of what is now Cen t e r Stage concl usive ly estab lishe d the legal ity of the elect ronic -gami ng opera ti o n . T h ird, HEDA argue s that, even if § 13A-1 2-30 appli es, the State faile d to meet its burde n to estab lish that the seize d gami ng devic es were illeg al gambl ing devic es and that the evide nce inste ad demon strat ed that the devic es playe d legal bingo as that game has been defin ed by this Court .

611303 88

Final ly, HEDA argue s that there was no evide nce indic a ting that the seize d curre ncy or docum ents were used in or relat ed to il legal gamb ling. The centr al iss u e in this case is wheth er the gamin g devic es se ized by th e Sta te we re il legal gamb ling devic es or wheth er they were used t o c onduc t lawfu l "bing o" games , autho rized by Amend ment No. 569. We addre ss that issue first
.

A. W hethe r the seiz ed ga ming devic es playe d the "tra ditio nal g ame o f bin go." Amend ment No. 569 autho rizes "bing o" to be p l a yed in Houst on Count y under certa in circu mstan ces. Like mo s t of 4 Alaba ma's local cons titut ional amen dment s rel ating to b ingo, Amend ment No. 569 does not expre ssly defin e the term "bing o." The i mplem entin g leg islat ion f or Am endme nt No . 569 , how ever, does provi de that t h e t erm "bing o" refer s to "[t]h e game,

commo nly known as bingo , wher e n u mbers or symbo ls on a card

are match ed with numbe rs o r s ymbol s selec ted at rando m." § 45-35 -150( 1), A la. C ode 1 975.

Amend ment No. 569 provi des, in part: "The opera t i o n of 4 bingo games for prize s or money by certa in nonpr ofit organ i zatio ns and certa in priva te clubs for chari table , educa tiona l, o r other lawfu l purpo ses shall be legal in Houst on Count y, subje ct to any resol ution or ordin ance by the count y commi ssion as provi ded by law regul ating the opera tion of bi ngo." 711303 88

This Court repea tedly has held that "bing o" is a form of lotte ry pr ohibi ted b y Ala . Con st. 1 901, Art. IV, § 65. See, e.g., Barbe r v. Corn e rston e Cmty. Outre ach, Inc., 42 So. 3d 65, 78 (Ala. 2009) ; City of Piedm ont v. Evans , 642 So. 2d 435, 436 (Ala. 1994)
. We there fore begin ou r a n a l ysis by empha sizin g once again that the vario us const ituti onal

amen d ments permi tting "bing o" are excep tions to the gener al prohi bitio n of § 65 and that, as such, they must be "narr owly const rued. " As we h eld i n Cor nerst one: "'Sin ce 1980, Alaba ma has adopt ed vario us const ituti onal amend ments creat ing excep tions to § 65, spe c i fical ly allow ing the game of bingo under certa in circu mstan ces. See Ala. Const . [1901 ], Amend m ents 386, 387, 413, 440, 506, 508, 542, 549, 550, 565, 569, 599, and 612.' (Emph asis added .) Thus, the bingo amend ments a r e excep tions to the lotte ry prohi bitio n, and the excep tion shoul d be narro wly c onstr ued." 42 So. 3d at 78 (quot ing Opini on of the Justi ces No. 373, 795 So. 2 d 630 , 634 (Ala . 200 1)).
In addit ion to t h is funda menta l princ iple of "narr ow const ructi on," we also recog nized in Corne rston e the n e e d, "exce pt where the langu age of a const ituti onal provi sion requi res other wise, " to "l o o k to the plain and commo nly under stoodmean ing o f the term s use d in [the const ituti onal]

811303 88

provi sion to disce rn its meani ng." 42 So. 3d at 79. Furth ermor e, we noted that, "'[a] lthou gh a legis lativ e a ct

canno t chang e the meani ng of a const ituti onal provi sion, such act may throw light on its const ructi on.'" Id. at 79 (quot ing Janse n v. State ex rel. Downi ng, 273 Ala. 166, 169, 137 So. 2d 47, 49 (1962 )). B a sed on the above -desc ribed rules of const ructi on, toget her with an exami nat i on of persu asive autho rity from other juris dicti ons, we held in Corne r s t o ne t h at the term "bing o" "was inten ded to refer ence the g a m e

commo nly o r tra ditio nally know n as bingo ." 4 2 So. 3d a t 86. Furth ermor e, we ident ified six eleme nts that chara cteri ze the game of bi ngo, the l ist b eing nonex haust ive: 5

As we expla ined in Ex parte State , 121 So. 3 d 3 3 7 , 356 5 n.9 (Ala. 2013) : "In descr ibing t h e eleme nts of bingo , our opini on in Corne rston e went only so far as neces sary to decid e the case prese nted there . Nowhe re do we take the posit ion that the eleme nts liste d the r e are exhau stive
. See, e.g., Corne rston e, 42 So. 3d at 80 ('For purpo ses of the prese nt case, the Riley defen dants do not conte nd that a "bing o game" must be playe d only on paper cards , and we, there fore, do not addre ss that issue .')." As we state d even more recen tly: "We ident ified in Corne rston e and we reaff irm today that the game of 'bing o' as that term is used in local const itu tiona l amend ments throu gh o u t the State is that game 'comm only or tradi tiona lly known as bingo ,' 42 So. 3d at 86, and that this game is chara cteri z e d by at least the six eleme nts we ident ifiedin C orner stone . Id. " St ate v . Gre enetr ack, Inc., [Ms. 11013 13, A pril 1, 20 14] ___ So . 3d ___, ___ ( Ala. 2014) (emph asis added ). 911303 88 "Base d on the foreg oing, we mus t concl ude that

the term 'bing o' as used in Amend ment No. 674[ ] was 6 inten ded to refer ence the game commo nly or tradi tiona lly known as bingo
. The chara cteri stics of that game inclu de th e fol lowin g:

"1. Each playe r uses one or more cards with space s arran ged in five colum n s a nd five rows, with an alpha numer ic or simil ar desig natio n ass ignedto e ach s pace. "2. Alpha numer ic or simil ar desig natio ns are rando mly draw n and annou nced one b y one . "3. In order to play, each playe r must pay atten tion to the va l u e s annou nced; if one of the value s match es a value on one or more of the playe r's cards , the playe r must physi cally act by marki ng his or her card accor dingl y.

" 4. A playe r can fail to pay p r o p e r atten tion o r to prope rly mark his or her card, and there by miss an oppor tunit y to be decla red a winn er. "5. A playe r must recog nize that his or her card has a 'bing o,' i.e., a prede termi ned p a ttern of match ing value s, and in turn annou nce to the other playe rs and t h e annou ncer that this is the case befor e any othe r pla yer d oes s o.

The const ituti onal amend ment at issue in C o rners tone, 6 Amend ment No. 674, is worde d simil arly to Amend ment N o. 569 and state s, in part: "The opera tion of bingo games for prize s or money by nonpr ofit organ izati ons for c h arita ble, educa tiona l, or other lawfu l purpo ses shall be legal in The Town of White Hall that is locat ed in Lownd es Count y, subje ct to an y res oluti on or ordi nance by t he to wn co uncil ." 1011303 88 "6. The game of bingo conte mplat es a group activ ity in which multi ple playe rs compe te again st each other to be the first to prope rly mark a c ard with the prede termi ned winni ng patte rn and annou nce that fact. " 42 So . 3d at 86
. We have since state d that our analy sis in Corne rston e is appli cable to the other local bingo const ituti onal amend ments in this State . State v. Green etrac k, Inc., [Ms . 1 1 0 1313, April 1, 2014] __ So. 3d ___ , ___ (Ala. 2014) ("[T] he game of 'bing o' as that term is used in local const ituti onal

am e n dment s throu ghout the State is that game 'comm only or tradi tiona lly k nown as bi ngo,' 42 S o. 3dat 8 6, an d ... this game is chara cteri zed by at least the s i x eleme nts we ident ified in Corne rston e."). Acc ordin gly, the facto rs ident ified in Corne rston e are contr ollin g i n deter minin g

w h e ther the gamin g devic es in this case are legal " b i n g o games " per mitte d by Amend ment No. 5 69. There are two gener al types of g aming devic es in this

c a s e : the elect ronic -gami ng devic es, which make up the major ity of the items s e i z e d by the State , and three "Roub ingo" table s. With regar d to the elect ronic dev i ces, there were four diffe rent types of game syste ms avail able for

1111303 88

play at Cente r Stage : Gatew ay, Firef ox, Imper ium, and Megab ucks. Eac h pla yer t ermin al co nsist ed of a to uch-s creen monit or. In order to play th e e l ectro nic games at Cente r Stage , patro ns were first requi re d t o visit a cashi er and purch ase a perso nal-i denti ficat ion numbe r ("PIN "). The trial court 's o r d e r descr ibed in detai l how the PINs were used to play the e lectr onic- gamin g dev ices: "A. When a perso n wishe d t o becom e a playe r he or she obtai ned a[] P I N code by payin g cash or appro ved f unds to an atte ndant . "B. This atten dant or cashi er enter ed the amoun t of cash as a credi t assoc iated w i th that PIN code to the netwo rk of compu ters, serve rs , a n d playe r termi nals to each ident ified machi ne categ ory. "C. Each pe r s o n playi ng the game activ ated a parti cular playe r termi nal or stati on by enter ing h is or her PIN c ode; "D. Upon entry of the PIN code, the playe r termi nal or play stati on machi ne autom atica lly displ ayed the amoun t of cre d i t corre spond ing to the cash the p layer prov ided to th e att endan t; "E. Each indiv idual perso n decid ed how much t o bet and then engag ed in a game o f c h a nce on the respe ctive mach ine; "F. If the perso n playi ng the game w o n the game, cash value credi ts were award ed to the PIN, and those credi ts could be used to play anoth er game on the respe ctive machi ne or on anoth er machi ne in the Cente r Sta ge fa cilit y;

1211303 88

"G. If a perso n playi ng the machi ne had a credi t remai ning when he or she compl eted p l aying all the games he or she wishe d to play, they retur ned to the atten dant and provi ded the assig ned PIN code. The atte n d a n t enter ed the c o d e attac hed to the netwo rk and there b y deter mined the amoun t of credi t attac hed to the PIN. If there was any remai ning credi t , t he cashi er pays the remai ning credi t to the playe r in ca sh." Accor ding to the testi mony at trial , each type of syste m p layed "basi cally the same. " Indee d, the trial court found that "the diffe rent ident ifiedelec troni c Bin go ma chine s had

a c o mmona lity in their form of opera tion. " Once a playe r logge d into a syste m by enter ing his or her PIN , t h e p l a yer selec ted b etwee n a n umber of d iffer ent g ames. All the games

were "basi cally the same" but displ ayed diffe rent symbo ls and backg round s, dep e n d i n g on the type of game selec ted. The playe r selec ted the amoun t he or she inten ded to wager on each game. Each game displ ayed one or more five- by-fi ve c o l u mn grids popul ated with numbe rs. When the playe r touch e d t he "p l a y butto n" on the scree n, the game rapid ly gener ated numbe rs th at we re di splay ed on the side and/o r bot tom o f the

scree n. T he ga me au tomat icall y hig hligh ted m atchi ng nu mbers withi n the grid and ident ified winni ng patte rns by displ aying

1311303 88

the w ord " daub" over the numbe rs fo rming thos e pat terns . In order to w in th e gam e, th e pla yer w as re quire d to touch that part of th e scr een d ispla ying the w ord " daub" and then touch the "bing o butto n" on the scree n. Touch ing the scree n in any other locat ion had no effec t. Faili ng to touch the "daub " or "bing o but tons" with in a speci fied time cause d the play er to lose the g ame. The entir e gam e can be p layedin a matt er of

secon ds. The t e s t i m ony was dispu ted as to wheth er playe rs of the elect ro nic machi nes were requi red to compe te again st one anoth er. The machi nes were netwo rked toget her, and H E DA's exper t testi fied that the softw are requi red that at least two p l a y ers be logge d on and playi ng the same game at the s a m e time in order for the game to funct i o n . One of the State 's witne sses, howev er, t e s t i fied that, follo wing a searc h of Cente r Sta ge du ring which the gamin g fac ility was clear ed of all patro ns, he was abl e t o conti nue to play the elect ronic games by himse lf, witho ut other playe rs. Furth ermor e , the evide nce estab lishe d that there was no way for a playe r to know how m any o ther playe rs he or s he wa s com petin g aga inst, or wh at pl ayers were invo lved in th e sam e gam e. N or wo uld a

1411303 88

losin g playe r be able to ident ify who had won a parti cular game sessi on, and playe rs were not requi red to orall y annou nce a win
. The State also seize d three "Roub ingo" table s from Cente r Stage . Roubi ngo is a table game that combi nes eleme nts of roule tte and bingo
. A Roubi ngo table is cover ed in green felt and has a numbe red grid arran ged in three long verti cal colum ns. To play, playe rs must purch ase betti ng chips , which h e o r she then wager s by placi ng the chips on the num b e r e d g r i d . A "tabl e boss, " who overs ees the play of the game, deter mines when betti ng is stopp ed. Inste ad of a rou l e t te wheel , the tabl e is equip ped w ith a ball blow er. The " table boss" activ ates the ball blowe r and then selec ts two balls

-–

a "B" ball and an "O" ball. The winni ng numbe r is deter mined b y m atchi ng the first numbe r of the "B" ball with the l a s t numbe r of "O" b all. A pl ayer whose chip s wer e pla ced o n the winni ng numbe r wins add i tiona l chips based on the amoun t of chips wage red. The trial c o u r t evalu ated both the elect ronic -gami ng devic es and the RouBi ngo table s a n d concl uded that those "were not the game commo nly or tradi tiona lly known as bingo ."

1511303 88

First , the tria l cou rt ad dress ed th e ele ctron ic ma chine s and each of th e ele ments desc ribedin C orner stone and reaff irmed in su bsequ ent c ases. Elect ronic Mach ines As to the first eleme nt, which expla ins that the game is 7

one that is playe d on "one or more cards " with certa in chara cteri stics , the tria l cou rt fo und a s fol lows: "A. BINGO CARDS . [T]he re a r e no cardb oard, paper , or print ed Bingo Cards ut i l ized by the playe rs in playi ng any of the elect ronic machi nes at the Cente r Stage facil ity
. H EDA asser ts that an el e c t ronic confi gurat ion of the Bingo Cards satis fies the ini tial requi remen t under Corne rston e that the games are playe d with 'card s.' The Court finds no Al a b ama prece dent which adopt s th is line of reaso ning. An anima ted portr ayal of a Bingo Card does n o t satis fy the Bingo Card requi remen t of Corne rston e."
In its brief to this Cou r t , HEDA argue s that the term "bing o" do es no t ref er to the "trad ition al .. . pla y of bingo set o ut by the trial cour t in its o rder. " Se e, e. g., H EDA's brief , at 33. Among o ther thing s, HEDA speci fical ly argue s

In its brief , HEDA repea tedly refer s to t h e eleme nts 7 liste d in Corne rst o n e a s "fact ors," perha ps imply ing that somet hing less than all o f the m mus t be prese nt in orde r for a game to quali fy as the tradi tio n a l g a m e of bingo
. These items are more prope rly refer red to as "elem ents, " in that, as noted , the game commo nl y o r tradi tiona lly known as bingo inclu des " at le ast t hese six e lemen ts." 1611303 88

that the trial court erred in findi ng that the games here did not q ualif y as bingo beca use t hey w ere n ot pl ayed on "c ards" that were "card board , paper , or print ed." HEDA' s brief , at 45. The trial court 's descr iptio n of a g a m e playe d with "card boa r d, paper , or print ed [b]in go [c]ar ds" is in fact a desc ripti on of the game "comm only or tradi tiona lly known as bingo " and compo r t s with our funda menta l holdi ng in Corne rston e and subse quent cases that the term "bing o" must be "narr owly const rued. " Apply ing this princ iple, as well as the other rules of statu tory const ructi on discu ssed above , and in the a b s ence of "lang uage of a const ituti onal provi sion requi r[ing ] other wise, " we rejec t HEDA' s argum ent th a t an 8 elect ronic depic tion of a bingo grid w i ll suffi ce. We consi der, there fore, as did the trial court , that the t e rm "bing o" does in f a c t refer to such a card as the court descr ibed. See also Riley v. Corne rston e, 57 So. 3d 704, 734 (Ala. 2010) (reco gnizi ng that the tradi tiona l game of bingo is
Compa re Ex p a r t e State , 121 So. 3d 337 (Ala. 2013) 8 (noti ng la nguag e in Amend ment No. 7 43, A la. C onst. 1901 (now Local Amen dment s, Gr eene Count y, § 1, Al a. Co nst. 1901 (Off. Recom p.)), appli cable to Green e Count y that expre ssly provi des for "elec troni c marki ng machi nes," while also notin g the appli cabil ity o f all the other elem ents of bi ngo). 1711303 88

one "that is not playe d by or withi n the elect ronic or compu teriz ed circu itry of a machi ne, but one that is playe d on physi cal cards (typi cally made of cardb oard or paper )"). In 9 other words , we find no error in the trial court 's findi ng as to th is el ement . As to the sec o n d e l e ment, the trial court found as follo ws:

The trial court 's under stand ing i s not only consi stent 9 with the tenet of "narr ow const ructi on," but also finds ample suppo rt in cont empor ary d ictio narie s. T he Am erica n Her itage Dicti onary 240 (2d c olleg e ed. 1991 ), fo r exa mple, defi nes a "card " as a "[a] small , flat, usu a l l y recta ngula r piece of stiff paper or thin paste bo ard." Other defin ition s inclu de the f ollow ing: "Card : 'A usual ly recta ngula r piece of stiff paper , thin paste board , or plast ic fo r var ious uses. '" Rando m House Dicti onary of the Engli sh Langu age (2d ed. 1987)
.

" Card: 'A flat piece of stiff paper or thin paste board , usual ly recta ngula r; used as a surf a ce to wr ite o r dra w upo n, or for other purp oses. '" Oxfor d Eng lish Dicti onary 888 (2d e d. 19 89). "Card : 'Pr intedstif f pap er fo r gam es.'" Encar ta Wo rld E nglis h Dic tiona ry (1 999). "Card .... a flat stiff usu. small and re c tangu lar piece of mater ial (as paper , cardb oard, or plast ic) usu. beari ng in forma tion ..." Merri am-We bster 's Co llegi ate D ictio nary 186 ( 11th ed. 2 009). 1811303 88

"B. Alpha numer ic or simil ar desig natio ns are rando mly drawn and annou nced one by one. First the p a c e of the game is not contr olled by an actua l physi cal livin g annou ncer or calle r of the r a n d omly drawn Bingo Balls . The Bingo numbe rs are rando mly selec ted by a compu ter chip or a c hip locat ed in the mothe r board of the serve r. This compu ter contr ols t h e speed of the draws , which is by its natur e rapi d and faste r than any 'call er' could recog nize. Consi derin g the amend ment in quest ion on a narro w basis requi red by Corne rston e and prece dent cases , this facto r i s not satis fied at an y of the m achin e sta tions iden tifie d."
HEDA argue s i n its brief to this Court that the trial

c o u r t erred by findi ng that the games were not bingo o n t h e groun d that they are not condu cted "by an actua l phys i c a l, livin g annou ncer or calle r" who rando mly draws and annou nces, one-b y-one , the appli cable alpha numer ic desig natio ns. We rejec t HEDA' s argum ent. First , the secon d eleme nt itsel f, as set out above , impli citly conte mplat es a "c a l l er" of the natur e descr ibed by the trial court : "Alph anume ric or simil ar desig natio ns are rando mly drawn and annou nced one by one." 42 So. 3d at 86. This is parti cular ly true in the conte xt of our under stand ing, as expre ssed in Cor n e r s t one, that the game

commo nly o r tra ditio nally know n as bingo is o ne th at, b y its natur e, in volve s mea ningf ul hu man i ntera ction . Fu rther more, howev er, we made speci fic refer ence in the f i f th eleme nt

1911303 88

state d in Corne rston e to the requi remen t that a playe r w ho belie ves h e or she h as wo n a g ame o f bin go mu st de clare this fact "to the other playe rs and the annou ncer. " We also noted in Green etrac k, Inc., that, "in C o r n e r stone , we expla ined that, amon g oth er th ings, the game commo nly o r tra ditio nally known as bingo invol ved 'each playe r' utili zing a 'card ' with

a certa in patte rn and unive rse of a l p h a numer ic or other desig natio ns an d tha t eac h pla yer m ust r espon d to the r andom drawi ngs o f the se de signa tions by a n 'an nounc er' b y man ually marki ng t h i s c ard." ___ So. 3d at ___ (foot note omitt ed) (citi ng Corne rston e, 42 So. 3d at 86). See also, e.g., Bingo Bank, Inc. v. Strom , 268 S.C. 498, 502, 234 S . E . 2 d 8 81, 883 (1977 ) (expl ainin g that "[t]h e game of bingo is playe d by the

use of a 'Call er' who annou nces, one at a time, numbe rs drawn at rando m from a conta iner into which has been place d numbe red balls or o bject s for that purp ose") . HEDA argue s, as it does in respo nse to many of the trial court 's findi ngs, that "if an actua l livin g, physi cal

annou ncer is re quire d, th is cr iteri on ca n nev er be met by an elect ronic game and there wo u l d be no reaso n to apply Corne rston e to any machi ne or elect ronic dev i c e." HEDA' s

2011303 88

brief , at 47. HEDA misun derst ands the c entra l imp ort o f our holdi ng in Corn ersto ne an d the case s dec ided since then : The game of bi ngo i s in fact the g ame " commo nly o r tra ditio nally known as bingo ," i.e., one that does invol ve meani ngful human inter actio n in a group setti ng, not one that is playe d withi n the c ircui try o f ele ctron ic ma chine ry. As to the third eleme nt in Corne rst o n e , t he trial court state d: "C. Daubi ng or mark i ng Bingo cards . These elect ronic devic es fail to s a t isfy the daubi ng requi remen t enume rated in Corne rston e. The ball draw is rapid and there is no abili ty for the ind i v idual playe r to daub betwe en the ball draws . Furth er, th e m achin es allow only colle ctive daubi ng of ident ified winni ng patte rns not indiv idual daubi ng of a sing le match ing num b e r. Indee d daubi ng is not requi r e d until the game is concl uded and a winni ng pa ttern is i denti fied by th e mac hine. "
HEDA argue s that the trial court erred in focus ing on the fact that "ther e is no abil i t y for the indiv idual playe r to daub betwe en the ball draws ." HEDA conte nds that "noth ing in Corne rston e requi red daubi ng bet w e e n ball draws ." HEDA' s brief , at 47. We disag ree. As alre a d y n o t ed, the secon d eleme nt requi res that the alpha numer ic or simil ar desig natio ns being u s e d be rando mly drawn and "anno unced one by one." 42

2111303 88

So. 3d at 86. Moreo ver, the third eleme nt, as noted , requi res that playe rs "must pay atten tion to the value s annou nced. " 42 So. 3d at 86. It cl e a r l y conte mplat es that, follo wing each

annou nceme nt of a va lue t hat m atche s a v alue on th e pla yer's card, "the p l a y e r must physi cally act by marki ng his or her card. " 42 S o . 3d at 86. Obvio usly, if a playe r is to physi cally act by ma rking his or he r pla ying card, he o r she must have time to do so. As to the fourt h ele ment, the trial cour t fou nd: "D. Requi remen t to pay atten tion and mark prope rly. In a tradi tiona l bingo g a m e, the playe r is requi re d to pay atten tion to the ball drawn by the calle r and daubs , paint s, or marks match ing numbe rs o n his cardb oard card as they occur in a n t i c ipati on of achie ving a winni ng card. In this case the elect ronic mac hines or playe r stati ons at Cente r Stage are contr o l l ed by the compu ter chips and the elect ronic anima tions which are displ ayed by the compu t er and the compu ter prede termi nes the game- winni ng patte rn. The playe r does not physi call y paint or writ e a m a tchin g numbe r. In fact, the playe rs inter face with t he compu ter does not requi re th e playe rs to displ ay any parti cular atten tion or skill
. This facto r of Corne rston e is no t sat isfie d by the e lectr onic machi nes." As to this eleme nt , H E D A takes issue with the trial court 's findi ng that "the playe r does not physi cally paint or write a ma tchin g num ber" (emph asis in HE DA's brief ), n oting

2211303 88

no such requi remen t in the fourt h eleme nt. Clear ly, howev er,

as state d previ ously in t he same parag raph of its findi ngs, the trial court appli ed a stand ard by which a playe r was requi red to "daub [], paint [], or mark[ ]" match ing num b e r s. The essen ce o f t he trial court 's findi ng as to this eleme nt

was that there was no indiv idual , one-b y-one , physi cal marki ng of nu mbers by t he pl ayer as th e gam e pro gress ed, a nd we find

no er ror a s to this issue
. H EDA insis ts, howev er, that the games meet the

r e q u i remen t of the fourt h eleme nt that a playe r must "pay atten tion" and "prop erly mark" his card or run the risk of "miss [ing] an oppor tunit y to be decla red a winne r." 42 So. 3d at 86 . HE DA ar gues that this requi remen t is met b y the fact t h a t , at the concl usion of each game, a playe r is giv e n 3 0

secon ds to physi cally "pres s" a numer ic patte rn that has been elect ronic ally selec ted, recor ded, and displ ayed to him or her in th e spa n of sever al se conds . T his, howev er, i s not what

was inten ded by the fourt h eleme nt, parti cular ly when that eleme nt is readin p ari m ateri a wit h the othe r ele ments . The fourt h eleme nt conte mplat es that, as alpha numer ic or other desi gnati ons a re an nounc ed on e by one, the p layer must

2311303 88

physi cally mark his or he r car d acc ordin gly a nd "c an fa il to pay prope r atten tion or to prope rly mark his or her card, " 42 So. 3d at 86, in respo nse to an annou nced value at the time it is an nounc ed. The g ames at is sue i n the pres ent c ase d o not conte mplat e one-b y-one physi cal marki ng of the v a l ues

annou nced, but, inste ad, provi de by compu ter a prese l e c t ed winn i ng patte rn, and give the playe r the winni ng patte rn in its entir ety, and then give the playe r 30 secon ds in which to "pres s" that patte rn. As the State notes : "[P]l ayers did not have to pay atten tion to the numbe rs drawn " and "co u l d only mark winni ng patte rns after the compu ter highl ighte d them" for the playe rs. As the t rial court found , playe rs had no 1 0
contr ol over the recog nitio n of match in g numbe rs or winni ng patte rns. The compu ter ident ified match ing numbe rs and winni ng patte rns; the playe r was merel y requi red to touch the winni ng numbe rs after the compu ter had ident ified them for the playe r. The trial court concl uded that a game of this natur e did n ot qu alify as t he ga me of bing o tha t has been desc ribed by this Court in Corne rston e and subse quent cases . We agree .

Furth er, the mach i n e s made it physi cally impos sible to 1 0 mark numbe rs on the grid unles s the compu ter had ident ified those numb ers a s par t of a win ning patte rn. 2411303 88

As to the fifth ele m e nt annou nced in Corne rston e, the trial cour t fou nd as foll ows: "E. Recog nizin g a winni ng card and annou ncing befor e anoth er pla y e r . While playi ng the machi nes in quest ion the Playe r was not requi red to verba lly annou nce to the other group of playe rs that they had a winni ng patte rn. In all of the games in quest ion t h e indiv idual playe r pushe s a butto n to claim a prize
. The evide nce is c l e a r that on these elect ronic devic es the indiv idual playe r and his play [are] contr oll e d by compu ter softw are gener ated patte rns which dicta te the game. Each indiv idual playe r is not r e q u ired to ident ify any patte rn of p l a y to win. The playe r is not in contr ol of the r e cogni tion facto r. Hence there is no basis u n d e r the dicta ted play to verba lly a n n o unce. The opera tion of t h e machi nes does not chang e the Corne rston e requi remen t that 'a playe r must recog nize that his o r her cardhas a Bin go.'"
HEDA argue s that the trial court incor rectl y injec ted the requi remen t of a "verb al annou nceme nt" into this eleme nt. We disag ree. This, in fact, is exact ly what was inten ded by the fifth eleme nt in Corne rston e, par t i cular ly when all six eleme nts are read in pa r i m a t e r i a and in the conte xt of the funda menta l princ iple that the g a m e a t issue is, in fact, "that game commo nly or tradi tiona lly known as bingo ." 42 So. 3 d a t 86. Liste ning for value s that are "anno unced o n e b y one," phys icall y act ing t o mar k one 's ca rd wh ere a pprop riate

2511303 88

in respo nse to each such annou nceme nt, and, upon disce rning a winni ng patte rn of marki ngs, " a n nounc [ing] to the other playe rs and the annou ncer that this is the case befor e any other playe r does so," 42 So. 3d at 86, are all part of that tradi tiona l game. Moreo ver, as discu ssed below , the s ixth eleme nt expre ssly provi des that the game is, by defin ition , a "grou p act ivity ."
In refer ence to the sixth eleme nt, the trial court found as fo llows : "F. The group play and playe r compe titio n. Corne rston e requi res a group compe titio n where a numbe r of playe rs are compe ting again st each other in order to be first to mark thei r card and 'Bing o .' The tradi tiona l game of bingo is a group exper ience and it is easy to deter mine thr o ugh visua l obser vatio n that the group is p l a y i n g one again st anoth er. There is no testi mony or e v idenc e in this case that prove s this type of activ ity. Indee d, i t i s clear that a singl e playe r can win the game wit h o ut other compe titor s being physi cally prese nt. While these machi nes are netwo rked thro u gh a commo n compu ter inter face there is no demo nstra tive evide nce that playe rs are compe ting one again st anoth er. Inde e d i t may be a softw are con f i gurat ion in these machi nes would preve nt anyth ing other than solit ary play. The desig ner of the compu ter softw are in quest ion was the perso n who ident ified how these games were to be playe d. B ut, there is no evide nce that the group e x p erien ce was conte mplat ed in its opera tion. "

2611303 88

HEDA takes issue with the refer ence by the trial court to

a playe r's abili ty "to d e termi ne throu gh visua l obser vatio n that the g roup is pl aying one again st an other ." C onsid ering this langu age in conte xt, we are clear to the concl usion that the trial court meant nothi ng more than what this Court itsel f inten ded when it state d in the sixth eleme nt ident ifi e d in Corne rston e that "[t]h e game of bingo conte mplat es a g roup activ ity in which multi ple playe rs compe te again st each other to be the first to prope rly mark a card with the prede termi ned

w i n n ing patte rn and annou nce that fact. " 42 So. 3d at 86. Indee d, the full text of the sente nce in which appea rs the alleg edly offen ding langu age of the trial court is as follo ws: "[T]h e tradi tiona l game of bingo is a group exper ience and it is easy to deter mine throu gh visua l obser vatio n that the group is playi ng one again st the othe r . " A s t he State argue s, in the games at issue "play ers race only 'agai nst the compu ter clock ,' not again st other playe rs. Merel y linki ng va r ious termi nals throu gh a centr al serve r is not suffi cient ly like the tradi tiona l game of bingo to satis fy the sixth [elem ent]. " We agree and find nothi ng in the trial court 's concl usion s as to th e six th el ement warr antin g rev ersal .

2711303 88

In addit ion to the foreg oing, HEDA argue s that the State , in order to satis fy its b u r d e n o f proof in this actio n, was requi red to offer exper t testi mony conce rning the opera tion of t h e elect ronic -gami ng devic es. We disag ree. The Stat e offer ed am ple, and m ostly undi spute d, ev idenc e dem onstr ating the actua l game play on the elect ronic devic es at issue
. That testi mony inclu ded direc t testi mony from agent s who had playe d the elect ronic devic es and who had perso nal knowl edge

c oncer ning how the games playe d as well as video foota g e o f the games being playe d. No exper t techn ical testi mony as to 1 1 the speci fic opera tion of th e c i rcuit ry or softw are was

neces sary to suppo rt the trial court 's conc lusio ns that the devic es in quest ion d i d not play the "game commo nly or tradi tiona lly k nown as bi ngo." The t rial court conc ludedits order as f ollow s:

HEDA also argue s that there was no evide n c e indic ating 1 1 that the c o m puter serve rs seize d by the State const itute d illeg al ga mblin g dev ices. The reco rd, h oweve r, su pport s the trial cour t's c onclu sion that the c omput er se rvers seiz ed in this case were relat ed to the opera tion o f t h e gamin g machi nes. HEDA' s own exper t testi fied that serve rs w ere an integ ral part of the netwo rked gamin g syste ms. The testi mony indic ated that, as the serve rs at Cente r Stage were unplu gged, the termi nal scree ns in the gamin g area began power ing down or displ ayed a messa ge that they were "sear ching for the serve r." Furth ermor e, th e ser vers bore label s suc h as "Bing o I." 2811303 88 "It is clear that in this case the test facto rs

i d e n tifie d in the Corne rston e case have not bee n fulfi lled. ... Clear ly the games t h at the playe rs play at the machi nes at issue are not the sa m e a s the tradi tiona l g a m e known as Bingo
. Not only did they not quali fy with the Corne r s t o ne test, they place the compu ter-g enera ted game into an area where the incep tion and termi n a t ion of the game is not shown to the playe r. Each of the indiv idual playe rs has no knowl edge of their compe titor s and no abili ty to ident ify any other playe r that might be compe ting again st them. There is no way of verifyin g another playe rs' bingo victo ry and essen tiall y all human skill has been elimi nated from this anima ted versi on of the game. The devic es before this Court are not the ... tradi tiona l game known as 'Bing o' as defin ed by th e Sup reme Court ." "[T]h e Const ituti on is not to have a narro w or techn ical const ructi on, but must be under stood and enfor ced accor ding to the plain , commo n-sen se m e a n i n g of its terms ." Hagan v. Commi ssion er's Court of Limes tone Cnty. , 160 Ala. 544, 554, 49 So. 417, 420 (1909 ). As has been noted , " ' [ o ] u r pecul iar

secur ity is in the posse ssion of a writt en Const ituti on. Let

u s n o t make it a blank paper by const ructi on.'" Cole v . Riley , 989 So. 2 d 1 0 0 1, 1017 (Ala. 2007) (Boli n, J., disse nting and quoti ng Thoma s Jeffe rson' s lette r to Wilso n C. Nicho las, S e p t ember 7, 1803, 10 The Writi ngs of Thoma s Jeffe rson 419).

"'Law s are made fo r m e n of ordin ary under stand ing, and shoul d, there fore, be

2911303 88 const rued by t h e ordin ary rules of commo n sense . Their meani n g is not to be sough t for in metap hysic al subtl eties , which may make anyth ing mean every thing or nothi ng, at pl easur e.'" Id. (quot ing Jeffe rson' s lette r to Judge Willi am Johns on, June 12, 1 823, 15 Th e Wri tings of T homas Jeff erson 449- 50). Furth er, as obser v ed in Frate rnal Order of Eagle s Sheri dan Aerie No. 186, Inc. v. State , 126 P.3d 847, 859 (Wyo. 2 0 0 6 ): "'Whe n we ascen d to the bench we do not disca r d t h e ordin ary commo n sense obser vatio ns, exper ience s and intel ligen ce of commo n men.' " (Quot ing 37 Gambl ing Devic es v. State , 694 P.2d711, 717- 18 (W yo. 1 985). )
In accor dance with the foreg oing, we reite rate today that the game tradi tiona lly known as bingo is not one playe d by or withi n an elect ronic or compu teriz ed machi ne, termi na l , or

serve r, bu t is one p layedouts ide o f mac hines and elect ronic circu itry. It is a group a c t i v i t y , and one that requi res a meani ng f u l measu re of human inter actio n and skill
. This inclu des a ttent ivene ss an d dis cernm ent a nd ph ysica l, vi sual, audit ory, and verba l inter actio n by and betwe en those perso ns who are playi ng and betwe en the playe rs and a perso n commo nly known as t he "a nnoun cer" or "c aller ," wh o is respo nsibl e for

3011303 88

calli ng out the rando mly drawn desig natio ns and allow ing time betwe en each call for the playe rs to check their cards and to physi cally mark them accor din g l y. In accor dance with the previ ously state d list of chara cteri stics , each playe r purch ases and p lays the g ame o n one or m ore c ards that, in a count y such as Houst on Count y (in which the amend ment does not expre ssly permi t "elec troni c marki ng ma c hines "), are not elect ronic devic es or elect ronic depic tions of playi ng surfa ces but are actua l physi cal cards made of cardb o a r d, paper , or some funct ional ly simil ar mater ial that is flat and is prepr inted with the grid and the desig natio n s refer enced above . Roubi ngo T ables We turn now to the trial court 's rulin g that Roubi ngo did not const itute the tradi tiona l game known as bingo
. The trial court held :

"In addit ion to the elect ronic machi nes found at the Cente r Stage facil ity there were also other gambl ing devic es utili zed at the facil ity. One of these devic es was a game ident ified as 'Roub ingo. ' These games were const ructe d in the form of a table confi gured in a simil ar f a s h ion as the game of roule tte; howev er, in this case the playe r purch ased chips from a 'tabl e boss' and waged a bet by placi ng the c h i p s on a desig nated porti on of the table . When all bets are made the deale r draws tw o b a l l s

3111303 88

from a containe r blowe r locat ed on the table . Only these tw o balls are drawn and that deter mines the winne r. The deter m i n ation of the prize is desig nated by the call and numer ic v a l u e of the numbe r wher e t h e playe r has depos ited his chips , that is wheth er the numbe r of the B ball and the last numbe r of the O ball corre spond with the wager made by the playe r. Roubi ngo canno t be const rued as the t r a d i tiona l Bingo game. Bingo conte mplat es drawi ng of a numbe r of balls to deter mine a winning patte rn. Playi ng this game is limit ed to a selec tion of two numbe rs . T here is no physi cal marki ng or daubi ng in t h i s speci fic game. Any ident ifica tion or marki ng occur s when the chips are actua lly place d on the t able in the respe ctive numbe r desig natio n. No n e o f the eleme nts of Corne rston e are compl ied with by this devic e. It is illeg al gambl ing cloak ed in a 'Bing o' costu me. This game is not Bingo as the Supre me Court ha s d e fined that game. "
HEDA argue s on appea l that the Roubi ngo table s seize d by the State i n f act playe d the tradi tiona l game of bingo as def ined by this Court in Corne rston e and that the trial court 's decis io n is contr ary to the great weigh t of the evide nce prese nted at trial
. We disag ree. Based on our thoro ugh revie w of the evide nce and the testi mony prese nted at trial , the trial court corre ctly ruled that the gamin g devic es at issue in this ca s e d i d not play the game "comm only or tradi tiona lly k nown as bi ngo." 42 So. 3 d at 86. 1 2

We do not mean to be under stood as direc tly adopt ing the 1 2 analy sis o f the tria l cou rt's order as t o thi s iss ue. 3211303 88

B. W hethe r HED A's p roper ty wa s exe mpt f rom f orfei ture. Next, we turn to HEDA' s argum ent that its prope rty was exemp t from the seizu re and forfe iture provi sions of Alaba ma's gener ally appli cable anti gambl ing l aws, § 13A -12-2 0 et seq., Ala. Code 19 7 5. Amend ment No. 569 provi des that the Houst on Count y C o mmiss ion "may promu lgate rules and regul ation s for issui ng permi ts or licen ses and for opera ting b ingo games withi n the count y juris dicti on." On Febru ary 8, 2010 , t he Houst on Count y Commi ssion promu lgate d a resol ution regul ating the opera tion of bingo in Houst on Count y. That resol u t i on defin ed lawfu l "Bing o Equip ment and Suppl ies" to inclu de equip ment used for p layin g ele ctron ic bi ngo: "'Bin go E q u i pment and Suppl ies' shall mean any elect ronic or mecha nical equip ment, machi ne or devic e, or compu ter or other techn ologi c hardw are or devic e, (i) which is insta lled, o r is to be insta lled, a t a bingo facil ity and (ii) which is used, or can be use d t o p l ay Bingo as herei n defin ed. Bingo Equip ment and Suppl ies inclu des any machi ne, devic e or hardw are that assis ts a playe r in the playi ng of Bingo Games , broad en s t he parti cipat ion level s in a commo n game and inclu des all of the anc i l lary Bingo suppl ies. Examp les of Bingo Equip ment and Suppl ies inc l u de, but are not limit ed to, dispe nsers , reade rs, elect ronic playe r stati ons, playe r termi nals, centr al compu ter serve rs conta ining rando m numbe r gener ators and other proce ssing capab iliti es for remot e playe r termi nals, elect ronic conso les capab le of provi ding game resul ts i n diffe rent displ ay modes , telep hones and

3311303 88

telep hone circu its, telev ision s, cable s and other telec ommun icati on circu its, and s a telli tes and relat ed trans mitti ng and recei ving equip ment. Bingo Equip ment shall not be deeme d to be for any purpo se a 'gamb ling d e v ice' or 'slot machi ne' withi n the meani ng of the Code of Alaba ma 19 7 5, Secti ons 13A12- 2 0 ( 5) and (10) or any other provi sion of law, wheth er no w in effec t or herea fter enact ed." Resol ution 10-10 (2010 ). The resol ution furth er requi red that each elect ronic -gami ng-de vice termi nal opera ted under the resol ution must bear an annua lly renew able "mac h i ne-bi ngo stamp ." HEDA notes that each of the elect ronic -gami ng devic es at issue in this case bore a "mach ine-b ingo stamp " paid for by
HEDA and i ssuedby H ousto n Cou nty. HEDA calls our atten tion to the follo wing porti on of the imple menti ng le gisla tion enact ed by the legis latur e:

"Any other law provi ding a penal ty or disab ility on a perso n who c o n ducts or parti cipat es in bingo games , who posse sses equip ment used in condu cting b i n g o , who permi ts bingo to be condu cted on his or her premi ses, or w ho does other acts in conne ction with bingo , shall not apply to the condu ct when done pursu ant to this act or rules promu lgate d under this act." § 45- 35-15 0.15, Ala. Code 1975 . HE DA co ntend s tha t, be cause the elect ronic devic es seize d by the State were "equi p ment used in condu cting bingo
... pursu ant to ... rules promu lgate d under this act, " the equi pment was not s ubjec t to forfe iture

3411303 88

under § 13A-1 2-30. A c c ordin gly, HEDA argue s, the State 's forfe iture actio n under § 13A-1 2-30 faile d to state a claim upon which relie f could be grant ed and sho uld have been dismi ssed. We disag ree. Secti on 45-35 -150. 15 exemp ts perso ns from penal ties

assoc iated with the opera tion o r parti cipat ion in "bing o games " as autho rized by Amend ment No. 569. In deter m i n i ng what const itute s a lawfu l "bing o" game under Amend men t No. 569, this Court appli es the analy sis origi nally artic ulate d in Corne rston e and sum m a r i zed in Part III.A above . Notwi thsta nding a resol ution to the contr ary, t o the exten t that a gamin g devic e does not meet the defin ition of bingo as

a uthor ized by Amend ment No. 569, it remai ns a l o t t e r y prohi bitedunde r § 6 5 of the C onsti tutio n and , con seque ntly, punis hable unde r Ala bama' s gen erall y app licab le an tigam bling laws. In this case we af firm the t rial court 's ho lding that the gamin g devic es seiz e d f rom Cente r Stage do not play the game of "bing o" as permi tted by Amend ment No. 5 6 9. Accor dingl y , the prope rty in quest ion was subje ct to forfe iture unde r § 1 3A-12 -30. C. W hethe r the use of el ectro nic-g aming devi ces i n Houst on Co unty has b een " judic ially vali dated ."

3511303 88

Next, HEDA argue s that "the use of elect ronic devic es for playi ng bingo i n H ousto n Count y has been judic ially valid ated. " HE DA's brief , at 29. Speci fical ly, H EDA r efers to a bond- valid ation proce eding relat ed to the issua n c e of

reven ue bonds for the purpo se of raisi ng money to fund the multi -use enter tainm ent compl ex known as the "Coun try Cross ing Proje ct" in Houst on Count y, which would event ually in c l u de Cente r Sta g e . I n 2008, the Houst on Count y Commi ssion

e s t a blish ed a publi c corpo ratio n known as the Coope rati v e Distr ict of Houst on Count y for the purpo ses of issui ng reven ue bonds to devel op t h e Count ry Cross ing Proje ct. A key compo nent of the plann ed Co u n t ry Cross ing Proje ct was an elect ronic -gami ng cente r, and the reven ue bonds were t o be repai d, in part, by a speci al fee on each "char ity bingo machi ne" o perat ed wi thin the p rojec t. 1 3 The Coope rativ e Distr ict filed a bond- valid ation petit ion in the Houst on Circu it Court pursu ant to § 11-81 -221, A l a. Code 197 5. That statu te allow s a publi c corpo ratio n to

The bond- valid ation order provi ded that the bonds would 1 3 be payab le, in part, from "the Enter tainm ent Fees to be impos ed by the Coope rativ e Distr ict on each and every chari ty bingo machi ne opera ted withi n the Coope rativ e Distr ict at a rate of $1 ,312 per m achin e per year ." 3611303 88

"dete rmine its autho r i t y to issue
... oblig ation s and the legal it y o f all proce eding s had or taken in conne ction there with, " and "the valid ity of the tax or other reven ues or

means provi ded for the payme nt there of." In Octob er 2009, the Houst on Circu it Court enter ed a final judgm ent confi rming the valid ity and enfor ceabi l i t y of the bonds issue d for the Count ry Cross ing Proje ct. Upon the entry of a judgm ent valid ating the issua nce o f obl igati ons i ssuedunde r § 1 1-81- 220 e t seq ., Al a. Co de 19 75, A labam a law prov ides: "[T]h e judgm ent of the circu it court valid ating and confi rming the issua nce of the oblig ation s shall be forev er concl usive as to the v a lidit y of such oblig atio n s again st the unit issui ng them and again st all taxpa yers and citiz ens of each organ izing subdi visio n, and the valid ity of such oblig ation s or of the tax, reven ues o r other means provi ded for their paym e n t and of any pledg e, cove n a n t or provi sion for the benef it of said oblig ation s, to the exten t that the validi ty of any s uch pledg e, coven ant or provi sion shall have been prese nt ed to the court and valid ated by its judgm ent, shall never be calle d i n quest ion in any court in t his s tate. " § 11- 81-22 4, Al a. Co de 19 75. Cent e r S tage was const ructe d as part of the Count ry Cross ing Proj ect. HEDA there fore conte nds that the Houst on Circu it Court 's order valid ating the bonds used to finan ce the Count ry Cross ing Proje ct and appro ving the repay ment of the

3711303 88

bonds from fees impos ed on "each and every char i t y b i n go machi ne" serve d as a "fore ver concl usive " judic ial valid ation of HE DA's elect ronic -gami ng op erati on. We di sagre e. The final judgm ent in the bond- valid ation proce eding did not in any way decid e the centr al legal issue befor e the trial court in this case -– the legal ity of the s p e cific gamin g devic es opera ted by HEDA and seize d by the State . The purpo se of the bond- valid ation proce eding was to put to r e s t a ny quest ion affec ting the valid ity of the bonds . The legal ity of certa in ga ming machi nes o r dev ices was p lainl y not a su bject of those proce eding s. Acco r dingl y, we rejec t HEDA' s conte ntion that the judgm ent in the bond- valid ation proce eding is in any way d ispos itive of a ny is sue i n thi s cas e. 1 4
D. W hethe r the curr ency and g ambli ng re cords were prope r sub jects of t he fo rfeit ure p etiti on. Final ly, HEDA arg u e s t hat the trial court erred in grant ing t he St ate's peti tion for f orfei ture of th e cur rency and gamin g recor ds seize d from C e n t er Stage . First , HEDA

See also Redto p Marke t, Inc. v. State , 66 So. 3d 2 04 1 4 (Ala. 2 0 1 0) (hold ing that a court lacks subje ct-ma tter juris dicti on to ente r a j udgme nt in a ci vil a ction decl aring certa in types of ga m b l i n g devic es legal so as to preem pt futur e law -enfo rceme nt ef forts that migh t be direc ted t oward such machi nes). 3811303 88

argue s that the State faile d to prove that the curre ncy seize d had been used as bets or stake s in an illeg al gambl ing activ ity. The trial cour t hel d:

"All of the curre ncy and gambl ing parap herna lia seize d from the ident ified fac i l i t ies at Cente r Sta g e are clear ly conne cted with the overa ll gambl ing activ ity at the facil ity. The curre ncy in quest ion was confi scate d from cash regis ters, cabin ets and drawe rs in the cashi ers area; t he vault , two [auto matic -tell er machi nes] and in an offic e area . Agent Borla nd, the offic er in charg e o f the curre ncy seizu re, caref ully detai led t h e l o c a tion, amoun ts and areas where curre ncy was loca ted. It affir mativ ely appea rs from the testi mony that the curre ncy in issue is clear ly attri butab le to the illeg al g a mblin g at Cente r Stage ." Based on the recor d befor e us, the trial court 's concl usion is not " contr ary t o the grea t wei ght o f the evid ence. " Likew ise, the rec o r d suppo rts the forfe iture of the docum ents and recor ds seize d from Cente r Stage . The S t a te seize d recor ds relat ed to winni ngs, adver tisin g contr a c t s, docum ents about contr acts and pay rates for gamin g syste ms, lette rs co ncern ing C enter Stag e's t ax st atus and o perat ions, profi t and loss state ments , and feder al W-2G forms us e d to repor t winni n g s to the Inter nal Reven ue Servi ce. The State also seize d compu ters that conta ined elect ronic -gamb ling

recor ds. Secti on 13A-1 2-30 provi des for the forfe itu r e of

3911303 88

gambl ing recor ds posse ssed in conne ction with a n illeg al gambl ing opera tion. Becau se w e a r e affir ming the trial court 's judgm ent holdi ng that the activ ity at Cente r S tage const itute d illeg al gambl ing, the r e c o rds relat ed to that activ ity a re al so su bject to f orfei ture. IV. Concl usion On the basis of the recor d befor e, w e c onclu de that the trial court did not err in order ing the forfe itur e o f the items seize d by the State from Cente r Stage . The judgm ent of the t rial court is a ffirm ed.
AFFIR MED. Stuar t , B o lin, Parke r, Murdo ck, Main, Wise, and Bryan , JJ., concu r. Moore , C.J ., an d Sha w, J. , con cur i n the resu lt.

40