* 10:41 am - Well, this is a little bizarre. The state’s chief financial operating officer, John Filan, went on vacation yesterday while the governor’s budget office was still trying to craft the line item and reduction vetoes of the operating budget bill. No word yet on when those vetoes might be filed, but I’ve asked.

* 10:51 am - Big news from the Tribune…

In a crushing legal blow to former Gov. George Ryan, a federal appellate court this morning affirmed his sweeping fraud and corruption convictions, ruling that Ryan received a fair trial last year despite a series of juror controversies.

The decision by the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals clears the way for Ryan to begin serving a 6.5-year prison term that he received last year after a historic six-month trial. But his lawyers could try to forestall that with a further appeal.

In a 2-1 decision, the three-judge appellate panel found that U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer acted within her authority when she replaced two jurors during deliberations after the Tribune revealed they had failed to disclose information about their criminal backgrounds.

“We conclude that the district court handled most problems that arose in an acceptable manner, and that whatever error remained was harmless,” Judge Diane Wood wrote for the panel. “We therefore affirm the convictions.”

* 10:53 am - You can download the Ryan decision here.

* Excerpts from the majority opinion…

The fact that the trial may not have been picture-perfect is, in itself, nothing unusual. The Supreme Court has observed more than once that “taking into account the reality of the human fallibility of the participants, there
can be no such thing as an error-free, perfect trial…

[…]

throughout their briefs, the defendants note that the district court judge described some of her rulings as “difficult” or “close calls.” The impression they give is that this is some kind of signal that the court knew it was wrong. We draw no such inference. A district court’s acknowledgment of the difficulty of an issue, if anything, is a sign that the court has given it full consideration.

[…]

The high-profile nature of these proceedings gave rise to some unusual problems with the jury, but we are satisfied that the court handled them acceptably. For all of the reasons discussed above, the district court properly denied the defendants’ new trial motion. We AFFIRM the judgments of the district court convicting both Warner and Ryan.

* KANNE, Circuit Judge, dissenting…

My colleagues in the majority concede that the trial of this case may not have been “picture-perfect,” – a whopping understatement by any measure. The majority then observes that the lack of a picture-perfect trial “is, in itself, nothing unusual.” I agree that from my experience this is a realistic
proposition. There is rarely perfection in any human endeavor – and in particular jury trials. What we expect from our judicial system is not an error free trial, but a trial process that is properly handled to achieve a fair and just
result. That fair and just result was not achieved in this case.

[…]

To describe the circumstances surrounding the jury management and jury deliberations summarized above as “nothing unusual” is to simply turn a blind eye to the realities of what occurred – in order to save the efforts
expended during a six month trial.

[…]

Can this court, as a matter of common sense, accept the district court’s factual determination that at least some jurors did not harbor fears of prosecution when they rendered their verdicts? Can the majority say that these jurors retained their capacity to render fair and impartial verdicts that can strip the defendants of their liberty and result in the defendants receiving significant prison sentences after the jurors themselves were the subject of an investigation?

[…]

In the final analysis, this case was inexorably driven to a
defective conclusion by the natural human desire to bring an end to the massive expenditure of time and resources occasioned by this trial – to the detriment of the defendants. Given the breadth and depth of both structural and nonstructural errors, I have no doubt that if this case had been a six-day trial, rather than a six-month trial, a mistrial would have been swiftly declared. It should have been here.

Based on either the structural errors or nonstructural errors described above concerning jury misconduct, the convictions in this case should be vacated and the case remanded for a new trial. Because the majority reaches a contrary result, I respectfully DISSENT.

* 11:46 am - DuPage County may actually see a contested race for Democratic Party chairman.

* 12:46 pm - I’ve been curious when Ryan will have to report to prison. CBS2 fills us in…

The opinion came down after the court had granted Ryan an appeal bond, something that politicians convicted of wrongdoing almost never get in Illinois.

In granting the bond, the appeals court had said that once it reached its decision Ryan would have to immediately go to prison to serve his time.

* 3:28 pm - From the US Attorney’s office…

Statement of Gary S. Shapiro, First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, regarding today’s decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, affirming the convictions of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan and Lawrence Warner, United States v. Warner and Ryan, Nos. 06-3517 & 06-3528:

“We note the Court’s conclusion that “the evidence supporting the jury’s verdict was overwhelming.” Ryan and Warner were convicted of crimes in awarding state leases and contracts that were steered illegally in return for hundreds of thousands of dollars in benefits for Warner and Ryan, including financial support for Ryan’s successful 1998 gubernatorial campaign.

Regarding jury deliberations, the majority concluded that Judge Pallmeyer “took every possible step to ensure that the jury was and remained impartial,” and that while the proceedings gave rise to some unusual problems, it remained so. We are now asking the Court to enforce the order agreed to by the parties last December requiring the defendants to surrender within 72 hours.”

* 4:09 pm - AP…

Former Illinois Gov. James R. Thompson said his law firm was filing Tuesday afternoon for a rarely granted “en banc” hearing that would have the entire U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals hear Ryan’s appeal. Tuesday’s opinion was issued by a three-judge panel split 2-1.

If rebuffed, Thompson said, the firm would take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Gov. Ryan obviously is disappointed in this result but he has faith in the judicial system, as he has told you, and he has faith in his lawyers,” Thompson said during a news conference at the big Chicago law firm Winston & Strawn, which represented Ryan free of charge. Ryan did not attend

* 5:39 pm - From the US Court of Appeals…

Upon consideration of DEFENDANTS’ EMERGENCY MOTION TO CONTINUE BAIL PENDING APPEAL AND TO STAY SURRENDER DATE, filed on August 21, 2007, by counsel for the appellants,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED only to the extent that appellants’ grant of bail is extended until this court issues its mandate.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is REMANDED for the limited purpose of permitting the district court to determine the conditions of release.