Karmelo Anthony Appeal Moves Forward as Attorneys Challenge Jury Selection After New Trial Denied

COLLIN COUNTY, Texas — Karmelo Anthony’s legal team is moving forward with its challenge to his murder conviction after a judge denied his request for a new trial, and attorneys are now revealing more about the issues they intend to pursue during the appellate process.

Anthony, 19, was convicted of murder in June 2026 in connection with the fatal stabbing of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf during a Frisco ISD track meet in April 2025. A Collin County jury rejected Anthony’s claim that he acted in self-defense, and he was sentenced to 35 years in prison.

Judge Denied Anthony’s Request for a New Trial

Following his conviction, Anthony’s new legal team sought a new trial and challenged the continued involvement of District Judge John Roach Jr., who had presided over the original murder trial.

Senior Judge Sid Harle granted the defense motion to recuse Roach from the post-trial proceedings on August 19. Retired District Judge Michael Chitty was subsequently assigned to consider Anthony’s motion for a new trial.

After a two-day evidentiary hearing, Chitty denied Anthony’s motion for a new trial on August 22.

That ruling means Anthony’s murder conviction has not been overturned, and his 35-year prison sentence remains in effect while his attorneys pursue the appellate process.

Defense Says Jury Selection Will Be Part of Appeal

Anthony’s appellate attorneys are now providing additional details about the issues they intend to challenge.

In an August 28 interview with CBS News Texas, Anthony’s attorneys said the prosecution's exclusion of three Black women from the jury is among the issues they plan to pursue during the appeal.

Concerns about the racial makeup of the jury were raised during jury selection.

CBS News Texas reported in June that prosecutors dismissed the qualified Black prospective jurors remaining in the pool. The defense objected, but Judge Roach allowed the jury-selection process to proceed.

Anthony’s attorneys are now expected to ask the appellate court to examine whether there were legal problems associated with those jury strikes.

It is important to distinguish the defense's position from an actual court finding: an appellate court has not ruled that prosecutors discriminated during jury selection.

That remains an argument Anthony’s attorneys intend to pursue.

Private Trial Agreement Also Under Scrutiny

Another major issue involves an unusual private agreement between prosecutors and Anthony’s original defense attorneys.

During the new-trial hearing, testimony revealed that the two sides had agreed to keep certain background information involving both Anthony and Metcalf away from the jury so the murder trial could focus primarily on what occurred during their confrontation at the track meet.

Anthony’s new attorneys contend that the arrangement contributed to an unfair trial and affected decisions made by the original defense—including Anthony’s decision not to testify.

Prosecutors have disputed the defense's characterization of what occurred.

Prosecutor Bill Wirskye maintained during the new-trial proceedings that there was no agreement preventing Anthony from testifying and argued that unusual security and courtroom measures were necessary because of threats, misinformation and intense public attention surrounding the case.

Judge Chitty ultimately declined to grant Anthony another trial.

Defense Says Anthony Did Not Receive a Fair Trial

Anthony’s appellate attorneys continue to maintain that the combined circumstances surrounding the original proceedings deprived him of a fair trial.

Lead attorney Russell Wilson told CBS News Texas that the defense believes multiple aspects of the proceedings deviated from how a normal trial would be conducted.

The defense has raised concerns involving jury selection, courtroom access, private proceedings, the handling of background evidence and Anthony’s decision not to testify.

Those claims will now face a different legal test during the appellate process.

An appeal does not automatically result in another trial. Appellate judges generally review the trial record and the legal issues presented by both sides to determine whether an error occurred and, when required, whether that error was serious enough to affect the conviction.

What Happens Next?

Anthony’s attorneys have said they will continue the case before the Texas Fifth Court of Appeals.

A notice of appeal was originally filed shortly after Anthony's June conviction, preserving his right to challenge the conviction and sentence.

The appellate process could take considerable time. CBS News Texas reports that Anthony’s attorneys believe the process could extend for more than a year.

For now, Anthony remains convicted of murder and his 35-year sentence remains intact.

The appellate court has not granted Anthony a new trial, overturned his conviction or determined that any of the constitutional or procedural violations alleged by his attorneys actually occurred.

Black Community News will continue following the case as appellate briefs are filed and the Fifth Court of Appeals considers the issues raised by Anthony’s attorneys.

Editor’s Note

This article distinguishes between established court rulings and arguments made by attorneys. Claims concerning jury discrimination, constitutional violations or an unfair trial represent positions advanced by Karmelo Anthony’s legal team unless and until a court rules on those issues. This story may be updated as additional court records or appellate decisions become available.

Reader Question

Do you believe the appeals court should closely examine the removal of Black prospective jurors and the other trial issues raised by Karmelo Anthony’s attorneys, or should the original conviction and 35-year sentence stand?