
    Craig John PASICOV, a/k/a John Craig Pasicov, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr.; Janet Napolitano; John T. Morton, Respondents-Appellants.
    No. 11-6968.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 22, 2012.
    Decided: July 17, 2012.
    Neil H. MacBride, United States Attorney, Dennis C. Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia; Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Elizabeth J. Stevens, Assistant Director, Gisela A. Westwater, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Joseph Peter Drennan, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before KEENAN, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Craig John Pasicov, a native and citizen of Canada who became a lawful permanent resident of the United States in 1977, was convicted in 2009 of credit card theft, credit card forgery, and credit card fraud. He was sentenced to two terms of ten years’ imprisonment, and one term of five years’ imprisonment, with all of the sentences suspended. In 2011, Pasicov was arrested and served by immigration authorities with a Notice to Appear charging him with removability as an aggravated felon and for having been convicted of a crime of moral turpitude.

Pasicov sought bond in the immigration court, which was denied on the ground that he is criminal alien subject to mandatory detention pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) (2006). Pasicov appealed, and also filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the district court requesting a bond hearing, and contending that he is not subject to mandatory detention because he was not taken into custody by immigration authorities immediately upon his release from state criminal custody. The district court granted the habeas petition in part and remanded the case to the immigration court with instructions to conduct an individualized bond hearing within ten days. Pursuant to that hearing, Pasi-cov was granted bond and released, and his removal proceedings remain pending. The Respondents appealed the district court’s partial grant of habeas relief, contending that mandatory detention under § 1226(c) applies to Pasicov notwithstanding the fact that he was not taken into immigration custody immediately upon his release from state custody.

We have now squarely addressed this issue in Hosh v. Lucero, 680 F.3d 375 (4th Cir.2012), holding that aliens who are not immediately detained by immigration authorities upon their release from state custody are indeed subject to mandatory detention pursuant to § 1226(c). Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s order granting partial habeas relief to Pasicov and remand for further proceedings consistent with our decision in Hosh. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED.  