Can Prison Sentence Reductions Cross State Lines

Imagine you have a brother in prison. Many years ago, when you were both young, he made a serious mistake, a mistake you believe he has long since paid for. But the State disagrees. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison. During his incarceration, you moved to Florida and started a family. Despite the distance, you and your brother remained close. You visited often, and you wanted your children to know their uncle. To be closer to you and your new life, your brother requested a transfer from an Alabama prison to a Florida facility. That request was granted.

In Florida, your brother began to truly reform. He became a model inmate; working a full-time job inside the prison, volunteering, and mentoring younger prisoners. As a result of his good behavior, the Florida Department of Corrections rewarded him with a 7-year reduction in his sentence. Years later, you decide to move back to Alabama to care for your aging parents. Wanting to be near family again, your brother requests a transfer back to Alabama. The request is approved, and your family is once again reunited in the same state. But then, something goes wrong.

Upon his return, the Alabama Department of Corrections (ADOC) informs him that the 7 years of good-time credit he earned in Florida will not be honored. According to ADOC, he was never eligible to receive those credits under Alabama’s rules. Just like that, seven years are added back onto his sentence. You are furious. This feels like an injustice, how can a man be punished for moving closer to his family after doing everything right? How can one state simply erase years of earned credit, especially when he has already lost so much? You start to wonder: Can the Alabama Department of Corrections really do this? You need to contact a lawyer to find out.

In a similar case decided on March 28, 2025, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the ADOC’s authority to revoke correctional incentives earned by inmates who were transferred to other states. Richard Brokenborough was denied 2,604 days of correctional incentive time by the Etowah County Circuit Court on his 40-year sentence for third-degree robbery, and the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed that decision. In February 2011, Brokenborough requested a transfer and was moved to a Florida prison pursuant to the Interstate Corrections Compact (“ICC”). He was subsequently housed in a Florida Department of Corrections (“FDOC”) facility. While incarcerated there, Brokenborough earned 2,604 days of sentence reduction for good behavior, as awarded by the FDOC.

However, when he was transferred back to an Alabama prison on May 31, 2025, the ADOC declined to apply the correctional incentives granted by Florida. Brokenborough challenged this denial in the Etowah County Circuit Court, which rejected his claim. Following the denial, Brokenborough appealed, arguing “that by adopting the Interstate Corrections Compact… Alabama agreed to all the terms of the ICC, including provisions permitting an inmate to participate in programs provided by the receiving state.” Brokenborough v. Alabama Dep't of Corr., No. CR-2024-0611, 2025 WL 938664, at *1 (Ala. Crim. App. Mar. 28, 2025).

In response to Brokenborough’s claim, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals held that the ADOC could “not grant… authority to FDOC… to grant correctional incentive time.” Id. Further, the ADOC's “inability to grant correctional incentive time to Brokenborough is dictated by Alabama law.” Id. Accordingly, the FDOC did not possess authority “to grant such time on behalf of ADOC.” Id.

Under Alabama law, “no prisoner may receive correctional incentive time… [that] has received a sentence for more than 15 years.” § 14-9-41, Ala. Code 1975. In this case, Brokenborough was sentenced to 40 years, making him ineligible for correctional incentive time under Alabama law. Brokenborough v. Alabama Dep't of Corr., WL 938664, at *1. The court noted that Brokenborough “never began accruing correctional incentive time because he was never entitled to it under Alabama law.” Id. When the FDOC granted Brokenborough incentive time, it acted as an agent of the ADOC. Id. Therefore, the ADOC “could not grant actual authority to FDOC, as its agent, to grant correctional incentive time” because the ADOC itself never had the power to grant such time. Id. Accordingly, Brokenborough never accumulated incentive time. “Therefore, he is not entitled to relief on this claim.” Id.

In this case, the court made a harsh but legally correct decision under the applicable law. The FDOC placed the court in a difficult position. Under the ICC, the agreement through which Brokenborough was transferred, it was clear that the FDOC was acting as the ADOC’s agent. Therefore, Alabama law, which does not allow for correctional incentive time in cases involving sentences over 15 years, applied, not Florida law. The prison should have verified this before informing Brokenborough that he had earned incentive time. Florida’s failure to do so gave a man false hope, only for it to be taken away, all due to an administrative oversight.

While the result may seem cruel, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals was ultimately upholding a fundamental principle: a person sentenced under Alabama law must serve their sentence in accordance with Alabama law. This ruling does not mean that correctional incentives can never follow a prisoner across state lines. Rather, it affirms that the laws of the sentencing state continue to apply when a prisoner is transferred, those laws, not those of the receiving state, govern the terms of incarceration.

If you have a Federal Criminal case, a State Criminal case, a Municipal Case or a Family Law case, Worker’s compensation Claim, or any claim, contact Joe Ingram or Joe Joe Ingram Law, LLC at 205-335-2640. Get Relief * Get Results.