the prisoner by the receiving state. Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-31-101, art. 111(a). Defendant filed his demand for speedy disposition before a detainer was placed against him by the State of Tennessee. Finally, Defendant filed his demand for speedy disposition with the circuit court clerk instead of delivering it to the appropriate prison official to forward to the clerk. See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-31-101, art. III(b)-(e); Moore, 774 S.W.2d at 595; see also Wood, 924 S.W.2d at 344 n. 6. Accordingly, Defendant is not entitled to relief under Article III. D. Article IV Article IV allows an appropriate official to lodge a detainer against a prisoner confined in another member state and seek custody of the prisoner. See Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-31-101, art. IV(a). Article IV, like Article III p.2013) (<HOLDING>); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3585(a) (2006) (“A
holding that cr 60b applies to criminal as well as civil judgments holding the iad was not applicable to a prisoner who had been sentenced but was incarcerated in a local jail or holding facility while awaiting transfer to the assigned penal institution holding that because the stated purpose of the iad is to prevent interference with a prisoners rehabilitative environment there is no reason for the iad to apply to a prisoner until he or she is assigned to the institution where the sentence will be served holding that it is within the power of the legislature to determine that the community should be beautiful as well as healthy spacious as well as clean wellbalanced as well as carefully patrolled holding that the iad applies to prisoners held in county jails as well as state penal or correctional facilities