(b) upon receipt of the written request of the official referred to in point (a), the competent authorities placing the prisoner in detention shall issue to the official a certificate indicating the duration of the obligation under which the prisoner is detained for the time already served, the time remaining to be served for the sentence and the amount of reasonable time saved; the date of probation of the prisoner and all decisions of the National Parole Authority concerning the prisoner. Those authorities shall at the same time communicate to all other competent officials and courts of the host State who have deposited prisoners against the prisoner certificates and similar communications informing them of the request for detention or availability and of the reasons for such request. Neither this section nor the Prisoners` Agreement requires the application of a law on habitual offenders to a person on the basis of a conviction initiated in proceedings finally decided on the basis of the agreement. Applicability of the Agreement: The Agreement applies only to “a person who has served a sentence of imprisonment in a penitentiary or penitentiary establishment” (Articles III (a) and IV (a)) and therefore does not apply to a person awaiting trial. See United States vs. Reed, 620 F.2d 709, 711-12 (9th Cir.), certificate refused, 449 U.p. 880 (1980); United States v. Evans, 423 F. Supp. 528, 531 (S.D.N.Y. 1976), aff`d, 556 F.2d 561 (2d Cir. 1977). Since the agreement only applies to a prisoner based on a pending “indictment, information or complaint” requiring a “procedure” (Articles III (a) and IV (a)), the agreement does not apply to a prisoner based on a probation warrant.
See Reed, above. The procedure for the order of prisoners for a suspended offence is set at 18 U.S.C 4214 (b). The agreement also does not apply to probation criminals. See Carchman v. Nash, 473 U.p. 716 (1985). The agreement also provides that when a prisoner applies for an order in a case for which a prisoner has been filed, it is a request for a decision on all matters for which prisoners have been filed by the same “[S]tate”. Article III(d) In this context, the different federal districts have been separately designated as `[S]tates`. See United States v.
Bryant, 612 F.2d 806 (4th Cir. 1979), certificate refused, 446 U.S. 920 (1980). Prosecution of other charges that have not been the subject of any prisoner is not permitted by the agreement unless they result from the same transaction. (Article V(d)) ] Whether the examination of the latter is mandatory is not clear. . . .