Opinion ID: 733385
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Citation Bingo, Ltd. v. Otten, 910 P.2d 281 (N.M.1995)

Text: 22 The second New Mexico Supreme Court decision relevant to this case was Citation Bingo, Ltd. v. Otten, 121 N.M. 205, 910 P.2d 281 (1995), decided in November 1995. The specific issue before the court was whether a hand-held electronic device known as 'Power Bingo' is a permissible piece of gaming equipment under the Bingo and Raffle Act. Id. 910 P.2d at 281. In the course of its decision, however, the court made a number of general statements about New Mexico's gambling laws and policies. It began by observing that it would narrowly construe the terms of the [Bingo and Raffle] Act because such a construction was consistent with this state's policy against gambling. Id. at 282. It further noted that [w]ith limited exceptions, gambling is a crime in New Mexico. Id. at 283. More significantly, the court stated as follows: 23 We take judicial notice of recent newspaper references to 'the Las Vegas-night law' applicable to charities. While the record before this Court does not reveal whether gambling devices traditionally found in casinos have in fact been used in this state for gratuitous amusement or even to make bets, we find no statutory authorization for any 'Las Vegas-night' gambling in New Mexico. We are cited to no authoritative use of the term 'lottery' to include casino-style gaming. 24 Id. at 283-84 n. 2. The court also stated that video, electromechanical, and computer forms of specifically authorized games are against public policy. Id. at 287.