Karmelo Anthony’s case has moved into the appeals stage, but the latest court filing has created a new controversy around money, fundraising, and legal representation. After being convicted in the death of Austin Metcalf, Anthony is now reportedly asking the court to appoint an attorney because he claims he cannot afford one.
Anthony, 19, was found guilty by a jury on June 9 in connection with the fatal stabbing of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf during a high school track event in Frisco, Texas, in April 2025. He was later sentenced to 35 years in prison after jurors considered the charges and rejected his self-defense argument.
According to reports, Anthony submitted a notice of appeal the day after his conviction. In the filing, he reportedly stated that he does not have enough money to hire legal counsel for the next stage of the case.
The wording in the documents quickly caught public attention. Anthony was reportedly described as a “penniless, destitute, and indigent person,” language used to support his request for a court-appointed attorney.
That claim has raised questions because an online fundraiser was created after Anthony’s arrest to help with his legal defense. The campaign reportedly raised more than $615,000, bringing in a massive amount of public support before the trial ended.
The fundraiser has since been removed from GiveSendGo, adding more confusion around the case. According to reports, the platform said the campaign was closed after Anthony’s conviction because it had been intended for pre-trial needs and the funds had already been disbursed over the past year.
That explanation has not stopped people from asking where the money went. Critics argue that after more than $600,000 was raised, it is difficult to understand why Anthony would now be claiming he cannot afford legal help for his appeal.
Supporters may argue that money raised for trial costs, relocation, counseling, and family needs does not automatically mean Anthony personally has money available for an appeal. But the timing of the removed fundraiser and the new court filing has only made the issue more controversial.
The original case began during a track meet in Frisco, where witnesses said Metcalf asked Anthony to leave a tent where he was sitting. Court documents said the situation escalated, and Anthony later told officers he had been protecting himself.
Now, as Anthony begins the appeal process, the legal fight is no longer the only focus. The missing fundraiser, the court filing, and the claim that he cannot afford counsel have created a new round of questions in a case already surrounded by debate over self-defense, jury selection, race, and justice in Texas.
