A Texas judge heard arguments Thursday on whether Karmelo Anthony should get a new trial, putting the 35-year murder sentence he received two months ago back in play after the fatal stabbing of Austin Metcalf at a high school track meet in Frisco in April 2025.
The hearing centers on what happened inside the original trial, where a Collin County jury found Anthony guilty of murder on June 9 after four days of testimony, then sentenced the 17-year-old to 35 years in prison after several more hours of deliberation. That verdict is why the Carmelo Anthony Case is drawing fresh attention now: the defense is trying to reopen a judgment that already turned on guilt, punishment and the jury's view of what happened under the tent.
Anthony's attorneys say he was coerced into waiving his right to testify after a dispute over whether his testimony would be covered by an agreement limiting some character evidence. They also say Collin County Judge John Roach gave the jury the wrong instruction and kept courtroom restrictions that limited public access. The defense has called Derrick Jackson, a former Collin County public information officer, and Mike Howard, one of Anthony's trial attorneys, to support its bid for a new trial.
Bill Wirskye, the Collin County First Assistant District Attorney, said the post-trial filing contains several inaccurate characterizations of what happened in court. He said prosecutors wanted Anthony to testify and that the agreement was honored. Wirskye said he offered to keep the case focused on the facts and to stay away from historical character, adding that he wanted the parties to keep the peace. He also said, in arguing against the motion, that there is nothing better in his business than a testifying defendant.
That clash matters because it goes to the heart of the defense case. Anthony's lawyers have said he acted in self-defense, while prosecutors have described the stabbing as unjustified and plain and simple murder. If the judge finds the testimony dispute, the jury instruction problem or the access limits were serious enough, Anthony could get a new trial; if not, the 35-year sentence stands and the conviction remains in place.
Judge Sid Harle has already granted a separate motion to recuse Judge John Roach from further matters in the case, saying there were grounds for recusal in an order issued Wednesday. For Anthony, the next step is now straightforward and high stakes: the court must decide whether the trial should be done over, or whether the June 9 verdict will remain the final word.
