Dallas Criminal Defense Attorney David Finn Weighs In on Karmelo Anthony Judge Recusal Bid

by Dallas Morning News

The Dallas Morning News sought the opinion of Dallas criminal defense attorney and former criminal trial judge David Finn as Karmelo Anthony’s attorneys prepare for a hearing seeking to remove District Judge John Roach Jr. from further proceedings in the closely watched murder case.

Anthony, 19, was convicted in June of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf during an April 2025 high school track meet in Frisco. A Collin County jury sentenced Anthony to 35 years in prison. His new appellate team is now seeking both a new trial and the recusal of Judge Roach, who presided over the trial.

The recusal hearing is scheduled for August 19 at the Collin County Courthouse in McKinney, one day before Anthony’s scheduled hearing on his motion for a new trial.

David Finn Weighs In on Judge Roach’s Comments

Anthony’s attorneys argue that comments Judge Roach made publicly after the trial call his impartiality into question.

During a televised interview with WFAA two days after Anthony’s conviction and sentencing, Roach was asked whether the jury “got it right.” According to court filings cited by The Dallas Morning News, Roach responded, “Yeah, they did.” When asked whether Anthony received a fair trial, Roach replied, “I certainly think he did.”

Anthony’s attorneys contend that those statements amount to a public endorsement of the verdict that Roach would now be asked to reconsider in ruling on the motion for a new trial.

Finn, however, told The Dallas Morning News that he did not believe Roach’s public statements rose to the level necessary to warrant his recusal.

Finn’s perspective is particularly relevant because he has experience on both sides of the bench. In addition to his work as a Dallas criminal defense attorney, Finn previously served as a criminal trial judge.

Anthony Also Faces a Difficult Fight for a New Trial

The recusal issue is only one part of Anthony’s post-conviction effort. His attorneys have also raised questions about courtroom access during the trial, jury instructions concerning self-defense and an alleged pretrial agreement between prosecutors and the defense.

In separate comments to The Dallas Morning News, Finn identified the courtroom-access issue as potentially Anthony’s strongest argument. He noted that Texas law requires judges to make particularized findings on the record when restricting courtroom access and questioned whether that occurred in this case.

Even so, Finn said he expects Anthony’s motion for a new trial ultimately to be denied, regardless of whether Roach is recused.

“They are very rarely granted,” Finn wrote, explaining that new trials are generally more likely when circumstances such as new evidence, juror misconduct or serious malpractice emerge.

The August hearings will determine who considers Anthony’s request for a new trial and whether his effort to overturn the conviction succeeds at the trial-court level. If the motion is denied, Anthony’s challenge to his conviction can continue through the appellate process.