A retired Texas judge has denied convicted murderer Karmelo Anthony's request for a retrial, leaving his 35-year prison sentence intact, a ruling his defense team has already vowed to fight on appeal.

Retired District Judge Michael Chitty signed a brief, half-page order rejecting Anthony's motion for a new trial after a two-day hearing near Dallas. The order offered no elaboration beyond citing a review of the evidence and arguments from the original proceedings. Anthony, 19, was convicted in June of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas, and sentenced to 35 years behind bars.

The ruling marks a decisive defeat for Anthony and a legal team that had built its retrial bid around claims of procedural unfairness, including allegations of a broken off-the-record agreement, overly strict courtroom rules, and improper jury instructions. For the Metcalf family, it means the conviction that followed their son's death stands, at least for now.

Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis made clear his office saw the outcome as expected. AP News reported Willis's statement following the ruling:

"We respect, and expected, the court's decision denying the motion for a new trial. The jury's guilty verdict stands, and we remain confident in the process."

Defense attorney Russell Wilson struck a different tone, pledging to continue the fight through every available legal channel. He said his commitment to his client had not changed and that he would "continue to advocate vigorously on his behalf through every lawful avenue available."

A fatal stabbing at a Frisco track meet started it all

The case dates to April 2025, when Anthony stabbed Metcalf once in the chest during an argument at a school track meet in Frisco, a suburb north of Dallas. The dispute began over seating. Witnesses at trial testified that Anthony had been asked to leave the tent area as many as 15 times before the confrontation turned fatal.

Metcalf, a 17-year-old high school student, died in the arms of his twin brother, Hunter. Anthony fled the scene immediately after the stabbing. When police confronted him, he reportedly told officers, "I'm not alleged, I did it." He also asked whether Metcalf was "going to be OK."

Anthony later claimed self-defense. "I was protecting myself. He put his hands on me," he said. But the jury rejected that argument. At trial, prosecutors presented evidence that Anthony had instigated the conflict. A police report included Anthony's own words to Metcalf before the stabbing: "Touch me and see what happens," the New York Post reported.

Disturbing evidence kept from the jury also surfaced after the trial. That evidence included a 2023 text message in which Anthony threatened to "shoot the school up." The jury never heard it.

Defense claimed a backroom deal cost Anthony his right to testify

Anthony's defense team, described by some observers as a "dream team" assembled after the original conviction, built its retrial motion on several grounds. The central argument involved a pre-trial agreement between the original defense and prosecution. Under the deal, both sides agreed to keep certain damaging character evidence away from the jury.

But the defense claimed the agreement created a trap. If Anthony took the stand in his own defense, the prosecution could void the deal and introduce that character evidence. Faced with that risk, Anthony did not testify. His current attorney, Wilson, argued this arrangement effectively denied Anthony his right to tell his side of the story.

The defense also raised concerns about strict courtroom access rules during the original trial and alleged improper jury instructions, though the specific details of those claims were not elaborated in the court's order or in public reporting.

In a legal system that depends on fair procedures and clear rules, those claims deserved a hearing. They got one, a two-day hearing before a retired judge brought in specifically because the original trial judge had been removed. And after reviewing the full record, Judge Chitty found no basis to grant a new trial. In an era when courts at every level are being asked to revisit settled decisions, the half-page denial spoke volumes in its brevity.

Original trial judge removed over post-verdict comments

One procedural victory Anthony's team did secure came in August, when the original trial judge, John Roach, was removed from the appeal process. Roach had given a television interview after the verdict in which he publicly agreed with the jury's decision. "Yeah, they did, whatever they say, they got it right," Roach told WFAA TV.

Defense attorneys argued those comments showed bias and made it impossible for Roach to preside fairly over a retrial motion. Judge Sid Harle agreed, finding that "a reasonable outside observer could question whether Judge John Roach appeared impartial" based on his post-verdict public statements. Harle granted the recusal motion, and retired Judge Michael Chitty was brought in to handle the retrial hearing.

The defense also raised concerns about jury composition. During the original trial, Roach excused three prospective Black jurors, and the final panel included no Black jurors. Anthony's team cited this as an additional ground for a new trial, the Washington Examiner reported.

Frederick Douglass Haynes III, a prominent supporter of Anthony, said Roach "jumped the gun" by publicly endorsing the verdict. But removing Roach from the case and replacing him with a retired judge did not change the outcome. Chitty reviewed the same evidence, heard the same arguments, and reached the same conclusion the jury had.

Anthony's fight moves to direct appeal

With the retrial motion denied, Anthony's legal battle now shifts to the direct appeals process. Wilson has made clear he intends to pursue every available avenue, and the case is likely to draw continued public attention given the high-profile nature of the original crime and trial.

Fox News reported that Chitty's order was filed on Monday, formally closing the retrial chapter. The conviction and 35-year sentence remain in place unless an appellate court intervenes.

The question now is whether appellate judges will find merit in the procedural arguments that Chitty rejected. Courts do sometimes overturn convictions on procedural grounds, and the issues surrounding the pre-trial agreement and Anthony's decision not to testify will likely form the backbone of any appeal. Judicial decisions that uphold the integrity of trial proceedings against procedural challenges are never popular with defendants, but they serve a purpose: finality matters in a system built on the rule of law.

Still, the facts of the underlying case remain stark. A 17-year-old was stabbed to death at a school track meet. Witnesses said the killer had been told to leave more than a dozen times. He fled. He confessed. A jury convicted him. And now two judges, one removed for speaking too freely, one brought in to ensure fairness, have both concluded the verdict was sound.

For the Metcalf family, the legal process has meant reliving the worst day of their lives across multiple hearings and motions. Austin Metcalf died in his twin brother's arms at 17. No procedural argument changes that. The broader debate about judicial authority and the boundaries of fair process will continue in courtrooms across the country, but in this case, the system delivered an answer and has now delivered it twice.

A jury heard the evidence. A judge reviewed it again. The answer was the same both times. At some point, accountability has to mean something, and 35 years is the price Karmelo Anthony owes for taking a life he cannot give back.