Texas judge upholds Karmelo Anthony’s murder conviction and 35-year sentence
Developed over time first seen 2 months ago
A Texas judge has denied Karmelo Anthony's bid for a new trial, upholding his conviction and 35-year sentence for the murder of Austin Metcalf, a 17-year-old fatally stabbed at a school track meet near Dallas in April 2025. Anthony, 19, had argued his rights were violated through pretrial hearings held in his absence and undocumented conferences by former judge John Roach, plus a denial of his right to a public trial, but presiding judge Michael Chitty rejected all grounds, closing off the defence's main route to challenge the verdict.
Anthony was convicted on 9 June and admitted stabbing Metcalf, though he claimed self-defence. The retrial hearing itself grew heated after prosecutors and defence lawyers disclosed information withheld from the jury under a prior "gentleman's agreement": evidence emerged that Anthony had previously threatened to shoot up his school and had made violent threats against his girlfriend, while the defence countered with claims that Metcalf had past incidents involving racist graffiti and an assault as a child. This material was presented to undercut the rights-violation arguments rather than to reopen the underlying case, and Chitty ultimately found no basis for a retrial.
- Judge denies Karmelo Anthony a new trial, upholding murder conviction.
- 35-year sentence stands for fatally stabbing Austin Metcalf, April 2025.
- Hearing revealed prior threats by Anthony and allegations against Metcalf.
New here? Start with this
Karmelo Anthony, now 19, was convicted of murder on 9 June for fatally stabbing fellow student Austin Metcalf during a school track meet near Dallas, Texas, in April 2025. He received a 35-year prison sentence. The case drew significant national attention, partly because of the circumstances of the killing at a school sporting event and the age of those involved.
After the conviction, Anthony's defence team sought a new trial, arguing that his legal rights had been breached. They pointed to pretrial hearings that took place without him present and to undocumented conferences involving John Roach, who was then a Collin County judge, as grounds for overturning the verdict.
A Texas judge has now considered and rejected those arguments, refusing to order a retrial. This decision closes off one of the main legal avenues the defence had been pursuing to challenge the conviction, though further appeals may still follow.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of granting a new trial would argue that the seriousness and finality of a murder conviction make rigorous review essential. If the defence identified credible legal errors, improperly admitted evidence, inadequate representation, or new material capable of affecting the verdict, a retrial would protect due process and public confidence that the conviction was reached fairly.
The case against
Supporters of denying a new trial would argue that a conviction reached through a lawful trial should not be reopened merely because the defence disagrees with the outcome. Unless the lawyers can show a significant error or genuinely new evidence likely to have changed the verdict, preserving the judgment respects the jury’s role, avoids further distress for the victim’s family, and supports the finality of criminal proceedings.
More coverage
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Karmelo Anthony is DENIED new trial after being convicted of murdering Austin Metcalf”.