A former Florida college professor at the center of a celebrated terrorism prosecution, Sami Al-Arian, saw a federal appeals court dash his hopes for relief today, only to have the same court revive them a short time later.

Last month, a three-judge panel of the Richmond, Va.-based 4th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a contempt order issued against Al-Arian after he refused to testify before a grand jury investigating Muslim charities in Northern Virginia. As is customary, Al-Arian’s attorney filed a petition asking the panel to reconsider its ruling and asking that the full 10-judge bench of the 4th Circuit rehear the case.

Today, the 4th Circuit issued an order denying Al-Arian’s request. However, a short time later, the court withdrew the denial.

The court’s chief deputy clerk, Mark Zanchelli, confirmed that the court denied the petition and “immediately thereafter” cancelled the denial. He said he could not elaborate on the reasons for the unusual back-to-back orders.

A Pennsylvania attorney who has a blog about appellate courts, Howard Bashman, said such apparent indecision is uncommon. “It happens very rarely,” he said.

Mr. Bashman noted that denials of petitions for rehearing are followed quite closely by attorneys involved, since those denials start the 90-day period to ask the Supreme Court to take up a case. “Most of the time that’s not anything that disappears,” he said.

Al-Arian’s attorney for the appeal, C. Peter Erlinder of William Mitchell School of Law in St. Paul, Minn., said he had “no idea” why the court apparently waffled.

Lawyers familiar with appeals court procedures said the back-to-back orders probably reflect an internal miscommunication at the court. However, the discrepancy could also indicate that at least one of the 4th Circuit’s judges believes that Al-Arian’s appeal warrants further attention.

Al-Arian, a former engineering professor at the University of South Florida, pleaded guilty last year to one felony count of aiding a designated terrorist group, Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The plea followed a six-month trial in 2005 in which Al-Arian was acquitted on eight charges while jurors could not reach verdicts on nine other counts. He contends the plea deal he reached included an agreement that he would not have to appear before any grand jury.

A spokesman for prosecutors in Northern Virginia, James Rybicki, had no comment on today’s developments.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Atlanta, is considering another appeal by Al-Arian, in which he contends his plea agreement was misinterpreted by the Tampa, Fla.-based judge who oversaw his trial.

Under the terms of that deal and his 57-month prison sentence, the Kuwaiti-born professor could have been released and deported as soon as last week.

However, his criminal sentence has been put on hold while he serves up to 18 months for civil contempt. Earlier this year, Al-Arian undertook a two-month hunger strike to protested the government’s actions against him.