Isreal

MEMORANDUM *

The Board of Prison Terms denied Isreal parole on the ground that he would pose a threat to the public, while his initial federal habeas petition was pending. At that time, Isreal could have asked that his petition be stayed so that he might exhaust the new claim in the California courts and then raise it in his pending federal habeas petition. See Calderon v. United States Dist. Court, 134 F.3d 981, 986-88 (9th Cir.1998); see also Fetterly v. Paskett, 997 F.2d 1295, 1301-02 (9th Cir.1993) (district court abused its discretion by refusing to stay proceedings so that the petitioner might exhaust a new claim and introduce it in an amended habeas petition). Having failed to do so, Isreal may not raise that claim, or an identical claim arising out of the 1998 parole denial, in a second or successive habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b).

In the alternative, Isreal argues for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 . Our “authority to grant habeas relief to state prisoners is limited by § 2254, which specifies the conditions under which such relief may be granted to ‘a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.’ ” Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 662 , 116…