CHICAGO – In a stunning decision, a federal appeals court has ruled that former Gov. George Ryan does not have to start his 6 1/2-year prison sentence as scheduled and may remain free on bond pending appeal.

But the appeals court said in its ruling Tuesday that if it upholds the racketeering and fraud conviction handed down by a federal court jury last April, the 72-year-old Ryan must go immediately to prison.

The appeals court’s decision represented a setback for federal prosecutors who had argued that Ryan should start serving his sentence Jan. 4, as ordered by U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer.

Prosecutors said there was little chance the guilty verdict reached after a six-month trial would be overturned on appeal, so Ryan should start his sentence as scheduled..

But Ryan’s lawyers argued that the tumultuous jury deliberations at the conclusion of the case – in which two jurors were dismissed and replaced with alternates because of police records – were badly flawed. They said the likelihood the conviction eventually will be thrown out due to jury problems justified granting bond to Ryan.

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Randall Samborn, said Wednesday that the government would have no comment on the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decision.

Reporters did not realize the ruling had been issued Tuesday until Wednesday morning.

Dan K. Webb, chairman of Chicago’s Winston & Strawn law firm and leader of the Ryan defense team, issued a statement saying that “Gov. Ryan is grateful that the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit entered an order allowing him to remain free on bond pending appeal.”

Webb noted that such decisions by the court are very unusual.

Longtime Ryan friend and businessman Larry Warner also was convicted in the trial. The appeals court’s decision did not involve Warner or his 3 1/2-year prison sentence.

The four-page decision contained no explanation of the order.

“Appellant Ryan is granted bail pending the disposition of his appeal in this court,” the order said. “If the judgment is affirmed the grant of bail will end automatically, without waiting for this court to issue its mandate.” It said Ryan’s legal team would get no extension to file briefs, signaling that the court wants no long delays.

The order was issued by a three-judge panel consisting of Chief Judge Frank H. Easterbrook and Judges Terence T. Evans and Diane S. Sykes.

Attorneys said there was no way to predict how long the appeals court would take to uphold Ryan’s conviction or grant him a new trial. But the order suggested that Ryan will remain free pending that decision.

There was nothing in the order itself to hint at how the court might rule on Ryan’s appeal. But prominent Chicago defense attorney Rick Halprin, who had predicted Ryan would get the unusual appeal bond, said the decision was guaranteed to rekindle hope within the Ryan camp.

“If you’re George Ryan you have to be very encouraged by this,” said Halprin, who does not represent anyone involved in the case. But he said the decision to grant bond was not “a sure predictor of what will happen.”

Ryan was accused of steering lucrative state contracts, leases and other benefits to lobbyists and business friends who in turn provided him with gifts ranging from vacations in Jamaica to a free golf bag.

The former governor, known nationally for declaring a moratorium on the death penalty in Illinois, also was accused of using state employees and taxpayer dollars to run his political campaigns and other offenses.

Much of the evidence in the case involved actions taken by Ryan when he was secretary of state for eight years in the 1990s before his 1998 election as governor. The husky-voiced, snowy-haired Republican maintained to the end that nothing he did while in office violated the law.

Appeal bonds are unusual. Most criminal defendants in federal cases who are sentenced to prison must start serving their sentences soon afterward while their lawyers fight their appeals. Ryan’s lawyers argued that the problems involving the jury made his case “a close call.”

Pallmeyer suggested to lawyers in the case that her decision to replace jurors after eight deliberation sessions might well be considered an error by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.