The decision marked an abrupt change of fortune for Einhorn, 58, the former counterculture guru who has been pursued by U.S. and Philadelphia authorities for nearly two decades ever since he fled to Europe as his murder trial was pending.

The same French court had ruled in December 1997 that Einhorn, who was convicted in absentia in 1993, could not be extradited because Philadelphia could not promise him a new trial if he was returned to the United States.

But now that Pennsylvania has passed a law granting him a new trial, the court said yesterday, there was no reason to deny a "favorable response" to the extradition request. The court added three conditions: Einhorn must indeed be granted an "equitable" new trial, if he asks for one; he must have the right to appeal; he must not be executed if found guilty.

The judges added that Einhorn could remain free in France until the long process leading to an actual extradition -- a process his attorneys said could take up to two years -- was completed.

After the decision was delivered by Presiding Judge Claude Arrighi, Einhorn, his goatee clipped and white hair newly trimmed, turned toward one of his Parisian attorneys and mouthed the word "What?" He looked tense, and gestured energetically as he and attorney Dominique Delthil huddled briefly in the grandiose Bordeaux courtroom below a large painting of Jesus on the cross.

Seated on a bench to Einhorn's left, two of Holly Maddux's three sisters, Elisabeth "Buffy" Hall and Mary Maddux, seemed equally surprised by the ruling.

Hall had said earlier yesterday that she was "not very optimistic" that this second extradition request would be approved. Speaking moments after the decision was read, Maddux said that she was "delighted. I'm stunned."

"I think we're giant steps closer to our dream goal of actually seeing him come off an airplane in chains in Philadelphia," Hall said.

On the possibility of Einhorn fleeing again before extradition ever comes to pass, Hall noted that the case had drawn media attention throughout the world and France.

"Everyone knows what he looks like," she said. "His story has gotten beyond the boundaries of this little area. . . . He might be able to run, but I don't think he'll be able to hide for long."

The sisters were flown to Bordeaux by the producers of the Fox television program America's Most Wanted, one of the many media outlets lured here yesterday by the story of Holly Maddux, the pretty cheerleader who fell for the charismatic hippie Einhorn, and whose mummified body was found in a trunk in his Powelton Village closet in 1979.

It was "not up to the jurisdiction" of France to pass judgment on the constitutionality of an American law in an extradition case, the court said.

Even so, the court declared in its 16-page written decision that there was no merit to the Einhorn attorneys' contention that the new Pennsylvania law was unconstitutional because it was written to apply only to Einhorn. In fact, it was "written in general terms and . . . can be applied in equal and identical fashion to all individuals finding themselves in the same legal position," the court said.

Demonstrating an understanding of U.S. and Pennsylvania laws, the judges also said that there was no possibility of Einhorn's facing the death penalty in Pennsylvania because Maddux was murdered in 1977, the year before Pennsylvania reenacted its own death-penalty statute.

The French judges noted that, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, legislatures "do not have the power to retroactively modify the definition of crimes and to change the sentencing" after a crime is committed.

"The things that Ira Einhorn is said to have done wrong and that led to his conviction on the 29th of September 1993 have no political character," the ruling said. "He has not done anything contrary to politics or contrary to a military" matter.

Einhorn's attorneys have five days to appeal yesterday's ruling to a superior court, the Cour de Cassation, which can "break," or reject, the decision if it finds that the Bordeaux panel followed improper procedure.

Such a rejection would be quite unusual, however. The case would next move from the judicial arena to a government one. France's Ministry of Justice and Premier Lionel Jospin would have to agree to sign an extradition decree formalizing Einhorn's extradition. Einhorn could still appeal to the Council of State, France's highest administrative body, but it is considered unlikely that the council would overturn the decree.

Einhorn's attorneys, Delthil and Dominique Tricaud, estimated yesterday that the entire process could take two years.

Both attorneys -- who in past hearings have argued passionately that U.S. and Pennsylvania laws are barbaric and unjust -- exhibited a surprisingly casual reaction to yesterday's ruling.

Tricaud said that, although there would be an appeal, he thought that the ruling was "a good one, because of two main points. . . . There is no possibility of a death penalty against Mr. Einhorn; the second point is that he has to be granted a new trial."

Delthil said that Einhorn was feeling "happy on the one hand, in that [ the decision ] seems to have given him room to maneuver. He has the guarantee he is not going to be thrown into prison in Pennsylvania for the rest of his life [ upon his return ] , that he would have a trial, and whatever sentence he had, he would not be put to death."

Delthil added, though, that he felt the U.S. government would not be able to "give the guarantees" on a new trial and death penalty asked by the French court "because judges in each state are independent."

Jacques Defos du Rau, the French prosecutor who argued the U.S. request for extradition, said yesterday that the United States might be required to make those guarantees in a written declaration submitted when an extradition decree was signed.

As the extradition case drags on, Einhorn remains free to return to the southwestern France village of Champagne-Mouton and the converted mill house that he and his wife, Annika Flodin, the daughter of a well-to-do Swedish family, purchased. Einhorn, who had entered France illegally using the false name Eugene Mallon, was arrested by French police at the house in June 1997 and spent several months in custody until the first extradition case against him was thrown out.

His attorney Tricaud said that Einhorn still must report twice a week to the village's police station under the requirements of his pending illegal-entry case.

Prosecutor Defos du Rau had asked that Einhorn be taken back into custody because of the risk that he would flee again.

Einhorn's attorney Delthil responded that that would not be necessary, saying: "He has decided to stay and fight. All that attaches him to life, his whole life, is here. He has no intention of going off on some new adventure."

But Delthil also noted: "I can't guarantee anything."