A Texas judge who oversaw one of the most closely watched youth violence cases in recent years has been taken off further proceedings, opening a new chapter in the legal battle over a fatal stabbing at a high school track meet.

On April 2, 2025, a rainy day delayed events at David Kuykendall Stadium in Frisco, a growing suburb north of Dallas. Two 17-year-old student-athletes who had never met before found themselves in a confrontation under a team tent. Karmelo Anthony, a senior and team captain from Frisco Centennial High School, sought shelter under the tent belonging to Memorial High School. Austin Metcalf, a Memorial athlete and football team MVP, along with others from his school, repeatedly told Anthony to move. Witnesses later described a tense exchange that escalated quickly. According to accounts presented at trial and in police documents, Anthony reached into a bag and warned something to the effect of “Touch me and see what happens.” Metcalf then made physical contact—described by some as a push or grab—prompting Anthony to pull out a knife and stab Metcalf once in the chest. Metcalf collapsed; his twin brother Hunter tried to help as athletic trainers performed CPR. He was pronounced ᴅᴇᴀᴅ shortly after arriving at a hospital. Anthony surrendered to officers, stating he had been protecting himself and admitting he “did it.”

The case quickly drew national attention, amplified by social media posts that framed the tragedy in racial terms—Anthony is Black and Metcalf was white—even though both the prosecution and defense told jurors race played no role in the events. Threats and harᴀssment targeted both families. Anthony, who had no prior criminal record, was charged with first-degree murder and later tried as an adult.

In June 2026, a Collin County jury in McKinney heard roughly a week of testimony, mostly from student witnesses who described the argument over the tent and portrayed Anthony as the aggressor who provoked the physical contact. Prosecutors argued the stabbing was intentional murder, not self-defense, stressing that a shove does not justify a lethal response with a knife. The defense maintained Anthony acted reasonably to protect himself after being touched and that Metcalf had no right to put hands on him. Anthony did not take the stand during the guilt phase. After deliberating for less than three hours, the jury rejected both the self-defense claim and the option of a lesser manslaughter charge, convicting him of murder. Later the same day, during sentencing, the panel also rejected a finding of “sudden pᴀssion” that could have lowered the punishment range. They imposed a 35-year prison term. Anthony’s mother testified that her son was remorseful. Metcalf’s parents delivered emotional impact statements, with his father telling Anthony he had failed his parents, himself, and society.

Anthony, now 19, was transferred to a state prison facility. A new legal team soon took over and filed a lengthy motion seeking a new trial along with a request to remove the trial judge, state District Judge John Roach Jr., from any further involvement. The new-trial motion, running more than 60 pages, focused on alleged procedural and consтιтutional problems rather than re-arguing the underlying facts of guilt. Key claims included:

Restrictions on public access to the courtroom (limited seating, no cameras or livestreams, early lineup requirements, and elimination of an overflow option) that the defense said violated the right to a public trial under the Sixth Amendment and Supreme Court standards.
An alleged off-the-record agreement with prosecutors to limit evidence to the events under the tent and exclude character or prior-act evidence involving either teen; the defense said prosecutors later departed from that understanding, affecting Anthony’s decision not to testify about self-defense.
Jury instructions that, according to the filing, made it harder for the panel to fully consider the self-defense theory.

Other procedural issues, including the pace of the trial.
Separately, the recusal motion argued that Roach’s post-verdict public comments created an appearance of partiality. In a televised interview shortly after the sentencing, the judge responded “Yeah, they did” when asked if the jury got the verdict right, and he defended several of his own rulings, including courtroom access limits and decisions during jury selection. The defense contended that a judge who has already publicly endorsed the outcome and the fairness of the process cannot fairly decide whether that outcome should be set aside.

On August 19, 2026, Visiting Judge Sid Harle, brought in from San Antonio, held a hearing on the recusal request. Dozens of Anthony supporters attended inside and outside the Collin County courthouse; some later chanted “Free Karmelo!” in the parking lot. Harle concluded that while he believed Roach could still rule fairly, the circumstances were such that a reasonable third party might question the judge’s impartiality. He ordered Roach removed from further proceedings in the case. A new judge—reported as retired Kaufman County Judge Michael B. Chitty—was ᴀssigned, and a hearing on the new-trial motion was set for the next day. Anthony appeared in court in a green jumpsuit; both families were present. Neither side offered immediate detailed public comment on the recusal ruling itself.

As of the latest reports, the new-trial request remained pending. If granted, it would mean a full retrial; if denied, Anthony’s team would likely pursue appeals through higher courts. The case continues to highlight tensions around self-defense claims in youth altercations, courtroom access in high-profile trials, and the lasting impact of a single violent moment at a school sporting event.

Source: https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2026-08-19/judge-removed-from-texas-track-meet-stabbing-case-as-defendant-karmelo-anthony-seeks-a-new-trial