HOUSTON (AP) — Hidden evidence. Prosecutorial misconduct. Flawed legal arguments. An unfair trial setting.

These are some of the claims attorneys for former Enron Corp. chief executive Jeffrey Skilling have made in appealing his 2006 convictions for his role in the energy giant's collapse.

A three-judge panel of the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans will consider today if the conviction was rightfully obtained.

"The defence has put together a very good (case)," said Jack Sylvia, a Boston-based attorney with the firm of Mintz Levin, who is familiar with the appeal.

Skilling and company founder Kenneth Lay were convicted in May 2006 on 19 counts of fraud, conspiracy, insider trading and lying to auditors for their role in the collapse of Enron, once the nation's seventh-largest company.

Lay died less than two months later and his convictions were vacated. Skilling reported to a federal prison in Minnesota in December 2006 to begin his 24-year sentence. He will not be present for the appeal.

Skilling is the highest-ranking executive convicted for shady business deals that led to Enron's 2001 implosion, which erased thousands of jobs, more than $60 billion in Enron stock value and more than $2 billion in employee pension plans.

Key to the appeal is 400 pages of newly released notes from FBI interviews with former Enron chief financial officer Andrew Fastow, which Skilling attorney Daniel Petrocelli has argued contain important evidence hid by prosecutors.

Fastow testified that his bosses, Skilling and Lay, were aware of bogus financial structures engineered by Fastow and his staff. Fastow, considered the mastermind behind financial schemes that doomed Enron, is serving a six-year prison sentence.

The trial judge denied requests to turn over the full notes to Skilling's lawyers, but after the trial, another court ordered the notes released.

In those notes, Petrocelli claims, is evidence contradicting Fastow's testimony that Skilling orally approved secret side deals to manipulate financial statements.

"Dismissal with prejudice is necessary to remedy the grave injustice and prejudice to which Skilling has been subjected," Petrocelli wrote the court in March.

Prosecutors dispute the claims.