United States v. Alfred, 1:19-cr-00079

Brian Alfred was convicted of possessing a firearm as a prohibited person under federal law after brandishing a rifle and threatening his mother and her caretaker in Texas, an act recorded on Facebook Live.
Alfred had prior felony convictions and, following his arrest, both federal and state charges were brought from the same 2019 incident.
He pleaded guilty in federal court and received a 180-month sentence; afterward, he was returned to state custody and later convicted of aggravated assault in Texas state court, receiving concurrent 10-year sentences.
Alfred is currently serving his state sentences in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice with a projected release of March 2029; a federal detainer is in place awaiting completion of his state sentence.
Alfred, acting pro se, requested transfer from state to federal prison, arguing that the federal detainer prevents his participation in state prison programs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Alfred should be transferred from state to federal prison to serve his federal sentence first	Federal detainer prevents access to state programming	No explicit argument—motion is pro se	Denied; State retains primary custody
Whether the order of serving federal/state sentences is relevant	Service of federal sentence should come first to allow program participation	Order of sentences is not dispositive; state/federal agreements control	Denied; Order of sentences not dispositive
Effect of federal detainer on state program eligibility	Detainer bars programming	Detainer does not impact state program eligibility	Denied; Detainer has no such legal effect
Defendant’s right to challenge sequencing of sentences	Unjust to serve state sentence first	No grounds to complain of sentence order	Denied; Cannot challenge sequencing

Causey v. Civiletti, 621 F.2d 691 (5th Cir. 1980) (State retains primary jurisdiction when transferring prisoner to federal custody by writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum)
United States v. Cole, 416 F.3d 894 (8th Cir. 2005) (Primary custody remains with the arresting sovereign until relinquished)
United States v. Londono, 285 F.3d 348 (5th Cir. 2002) (Defendant may not complain about order of prosecution or punishment for state and federal offenses)
Gunton v. Squier, 185 F.2d 470 (9th Cir. 1950) (Prisoner may not object to order of trial or sentencing by different jurisdictions)
Ponzi v. Fessenden, 258 U.S. 254 (1922) (State and federal governments can agree on sentencing sequence without violating defendant’s rights)