Texas judge denies Karmelo Anthony’s request for new trial in deadly stabbing at track meet

Karmelo Anthony’s Retrial Bid Rejected in Collin County Murder Case

Goldlaner.com – A Dallas-area judge has closed the door on a second courtroom chance for Karmelo Anthony, the 19-year-old convicted of killing a teenage track athlete at a high school meet last spring. On Saturday, Judge Michael Chitty issued a brief half-page order denying Anthony’s motion for a new trial, ending what had become one of the most closely watched criminal proceedings in recent Texas history.

The decision came at the conclusion of a two-day hearing held near Dallas earlier this week. Chitty cited his review of the trial evidence and the competing arguments presented by both sides but offered no further explanation in the written ruling. The brevity of the order left little room for interpretation, though the outcome itself was unambiguous: the June jury verdict stands.

The Underlying Crime

Anthony was found guilty of murder in June and handed a 35-year prison sentence for the April 2025 stabbing death of Austin Metcalf, who was 17 at the time. The killing took place in the bleachers of a high school track meet in Collin County, a setting that made the incident all the more jarring for the families and spectators present. The confrontation between the two teenagers escalated into a fatal stabbing, and Anthony later told jurors he had been acting in self-defense. The jury rejected that account and returned a guilty verdict.

The case quickly moved beyond the local courthouse. A wave of social media posts amplified the incident along racial lines — Anthony is Black, Metcalf was white — and drew national attention to what began as a local tragedy. Both sides’ counsel told jurors during trial that race played no role in the confrontation, yet the online discourse surrounding the case made it difficult to separate the courtroom proceedings from the broader cultural conversation.

Defense Arguments at the Retrial Hearing

Anthony’s legal team built their retrial request on two principal grounds. First, they argued that trial judge John Roach’s courtroom rules were so restrictive that they effectively shut the public out of the proceedings, undermining the transparency expected of a criminal trial. Second, they moved for Roach’s recusal, pointing to a posttrial television interview in which the judge told a Dallas-area station that the jury had “got it right.” The defense contended that such a public endorsement of the verdict called into question his impartiality.

Russell Wilson, Anthony’s attorney, framed the retrial effort as part of a broader commitment to his client. After Saturday’s ruling, Wilson confirmed the defense would take the case to a higher court.

“Our commitment to our client has not changed,” Wilson said. “We will continue to advocate vigorously on his behalf through every lawful avenue available.”

Wilson also noted earlier in the proceedings that Anthony had dropped plans to testify at the retrial hearing, a decision that narrowed the scope of the defense’s presentation before Chitty.

Prosecution Response

Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis addressed reporters after the denial was announced, expressing satisfaction with the outcome. Prosecutor Bill Wirskye had defended the original trial as fair during the two-day hearing, pushing back on the defense’s claims about courtroom access and judicial impartiality.

“We respect, and expected, the court’s decision denying the motion for a new trial,” Willis said. “The jury’s guilty verdict stands, and we remain confident in the process. Every defendant has the right to appeal, and our thoughts and prayers remain with the Metcalf family in the painful wake of last week’s hearing.”

Roach, for his part, maintained that his procedural rules were necessary to ensure a fair trial and that nothing in his conduct warranted recusal. Prosecutors echoed that position, insisting the trial judge did nothing improper.

What Comes Next

With the retrial motion denied, the defense’s remaining path is a formal appeal to a Texas intermediate appellate court. That process will allow a panel of judges to review the trial record for legal errors, including questions about courtroom access and whether any judicial statements outside the courtroom prejudiced the proceedings. The timeline for such an appeal typically spans several months, meaning Anthony will remain in custody at the state facility where his 35-year sentence is being served.

For the Metcalf family, the Saturday ruling offers a measure of finality after more than a year of litigation, media scrutiny, and what they described as harassment following the original trial. The case, which began with a single stabbing in a school bleacher section, has since become a touchstone for debates about social media’s role in shaping public perception of criminal cases, the boundaries of judicial commentary, and the limits of post-conviction relief in Texas courts.

The next chapter will be written in appellate briefs rather than courtroom theatrics, but the stakes remain the same: whether a jury’s verdict, reached under conditions both sides now dispute, can withstand the scrutiny of a higher bench.