The judge who oversaw Karmelo Anthony’s murder trial, sentenced him to 35 years in prison, and later discussed the case on television, will not decide if the teen gets a new trial.
On Wednesday, Visiting Judge Sid Harle removed Texas District Judge John Roach Jr. from Anthony’s case. He agreed with defense lawyers who said Roach’s public comments after the trial raised a fair question: Could a judge who publicly defended the proceedings now fairly decide if something went wrong?
“Today’s ruling answers a fundamental question: whether a reasonable, fully informed observer would see Judge Roach’s conduct and believe that he could fairly and impartially consider a motion for [a] new trial,” Anthony’s legal team said after the ruling.
The decision does not overturn Anthony’s conviction, erase his 35-year sentence, or grant him a new trial. Instead, it means a different judge will hear Anthony’s request for a new trial when his lawyers return to court on Thursday.
Anthony, now 19, was convicted on June 9 for the stabbing death of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf. The incident started with an argument under a tent at a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas, on April 2, 2025.
The two teenagers went to different schools and did not know each other. Anthony entered the Memorial High School team tent during the rain at the meet. After someone told him to leave, an argument broke out, and Anthony stabbed Metcalf once in the chest. Metcalf died at the hospital.
Anthony admitted to the stabbing but said he acted in self-defense because he feared for his safety. Prosecutors argued it was murder. The jury agreed with the prosecutors and rejected both the self-defense claim and the option of convicting Anthony of manslaughter instead.
However, events after the trial led to a new dispute.
Two days after Anthony was sentenced, Roach gave an on-camera interview with WFAA. According to Anthony’s attorneys, the judge talked about the jury’s verdict, the fairness of the trial, and his own rulings in the case.
This concerned the defense for another reason. Since being put in place in July 2025, a gag order restricted what people directly involved in the case could say in public.
The judge later made additional comments.
On June 17, Roach posted a letter addressed to “members of the Collin County Family” on the county court website, thanking everyone involved in the trial.
“Each of you contributed to ensuring the process was conducted fairly, safely, and with the dignity our citizens deserve,” Roach wrote.
Two days later, Anthony’s attorneys said Roach spoke publicly about the importance of transparency, even though news organizations had complained about limits on access to the trial.
For Anthony’s lawyers, the issue was clear. They planned to argue in court that Anthony’s trial was not fair, but the judge deciding that question had already told the public the process was fair.
They requested that Roach be removed from the case.
Harle, who came from San Antonio to hear the recusal request, agreed.
The issue was not whether Roach thought he could ignore his earlier statements. The real question was how the situation would appear to someone outside the case who knew all the facts. Harle decided there was enough reason to doubt whether Roach could seem impartial while reviewing a trial he had already discussed publicly.
“We appreciate the judge for traveling from San Antonio to hear this matter objectively,” Anthony’s attorneys said. “We believe for the facts and reasons addressed in the motion and applicable law that the judge was correct in granting the motion to recuse.”
The murder case has attracted national attention since the day Metcalf was killed. Metcalf was white, and Anthony is Black. The case quickly became part of a heated racial debate online, with people taking sides, raising money, making threats, and using the deaths and prosecution of the two teenagers for political purposes.
Inside the courtroom, though, the jury had to decide whether Anthony reasonably believed he needed to use deadly force when he stabbed Metcalf. They decided he did not.
Now, Anthony’s lawyers are asking whether the trial itself was fair.
Their motion for a new trial raises issues about courtroom and media access, jury instructions, and the circumstances around Anthony’s decision not to testify.
Wednesday’s ruling only means that Roach will not be the one to decide on these arguments, and Anthony’s lawyers must now convince a different judge that something happened during his trial that is serious enough to justify a new trial before another jury.
That argument is expected to begin on Thursday.
“We look forward to Karmelo’s opportunity to present on the motion for new trial tomorrow before what we believe will be a neutral and impartial judge,” the legal team said. “We will work to ensure Karmelo receives every protection and every measure of due process guaranteed to him under the Constitution of the United States and the laws of the State of Texas.”
