FRISCO, TEXAS — Attorneys for Karmelo Anthony filed an appeal and requested a new trial after a jury sentenced him to 35 years in prison for the murder of Austin Metcalf. The filings claim judicial misconduct and trial errors, including sealed records and public statements made by State District Court Judge John Roach.

Metcalf, 17, died from a fatal stabbing on April 2, 2025, at a track meet in Frisco, Texas. Anthony admitted to the stabbing. Anthony's legal team argued he acted in self-defense under physical intimidation after he was confronted by members of rival high school Memorial's track team while sitting in the bleachers under their tent and told to leave. Prosecutors rebutted this depiction of events, stating that Anthony threatened Metcalf.

Anthony's attorneys stated that Judge Roach should be removed from the case. The attorneys alleged that Roach violated the state's judicial conduct and standards code by expressing personal opinions in an interview with Dallas TV station WFAA. In that interview, Roach commented on the jury's verdict, the fairness of the trial, and the correctness of his own rulings, according to Anthony's attorneys. The attorneys stated that Roach agreed with the correctness of the jury's verdict, saying, "whatever they say ... they get it right." He also commented on Anthony being "a nice young man" who "understands today ... the consequences of committing a crime like ... he did," the attorneys stated.

Further, Anthony's attorneys stated that Roach defended the jury's selection in the WFAA interview even though the jury did not include a single Black person. Judge Roach also defended his ruling on media access to the courtroom in a statement to a news outlet, the attorneys stated. He then published a signed public letter on the Collin County website, addressed to the "Collin County Family," the attorneys noted, in which Roach referred to his work on the trial as "one of the great honors of my judicial career" and thanked those who worked to ensure the process was conducted fairly.

"A judge who publicly memorializes the trial as concluded, and publicly pronounces the process fair, while still holding the authority to grant a new trial, signals to the reasonable observer that he regards the matter as closed," Anthony's attorneys wrote in the filing. "Roach's comments, coupled with the fact that he imposed a gag order during the trial on any commentary by any other participants, 'sharpens rather than softens the appearance that the Court no longer sits as a neutral arbiter of the post-trial proceedings that remain before it,'" the attorneys also wrote in the filing.

Anthony's attorneys stated that the court erred by restricting public access to the trial, which they said violated Anthony's rights. They also stated that prosecutors repudiated an unwritten agreement between the state and defense to exclude certain character and "extraneous-offense" evidence, thereby denying Anthony the right to testify on his own behalf. The attorneys criticized the speed at which the judge conducted the trial, noting a court date on a Saturday when several defense witnesses were unavailable.

"When the moment came for the Defendant to make the most consequential decision of the trial, whether to waive his Fifth Amendment privilege and testify, the Court allotted the defense ten minutes to counsel a nineteen-year-old through it and denied counsel's request for additional time," Anthony's attorneys stated. The attorneys also stated that Judge Roach sealed the entire court file of the trial. They stated that they were only allowed to view the court file on the condition that they not share what was observed, a condition they did not agree to.