Karmelo Anthony, the 19-year-old convicted of first-degree murder for fatally stabbing 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a Texas track meet, has filed court paperwork declaring himself a "penniless, destitute, and indigent person" who cannot afford an attorney for his appeal, even though supporters funneled more than $630,000 into a fundraising campaign set up in his name.
The filing, first reported by Fox News, asks the court to appoint a taxpayer-funded lawyer to handle Anthony's appeal of his 35-year prison sentence. If granted, the public would foot the bill for an appellate defense that hundreds of thousands of donated dollars were explicitly raised to cover.
That gap, between what donors were told and what Anthony now claims, is the central question hanging over the case. And the timeline of fundraising activity around the Anthony family only sharpens it.
Shortly after Anthony's arrest in April 2025, a GiveSendGo campaign went live to raise money for his legal defense. Jacob Wells, cofounder of the Christian crowdfunding platform, told Fox News Digital at the time that "the bulk of this money is going to be used for Karmelo's legal defense."
Donors responded. The campaign collected at least $630,000 of a $1.4 million goal before it was shut down, National Review reported. But the money didn't all go to lawyers. GiveSendGo acknowledged in a statement that funds were disbursed over the prior year for "pre-trial needs," and National Review noted the money covered not just legal defense but personal family needs including home relocation, living costs, counseling, and security.
GiveSendGo closed the original campaign page after Anthony's conviction, stating its "purpose" was complete. The platform added: "Our hearts are with Austin's family, his twin brother, and everyone grieving a loss that no verdict can undo."
Within hours, a new fundraiser appeared on the same platform. Organized by Anthony's mother, Kala Hayes, the "Karmelo Appellate Fund" asked for fresh donations. Its description promised "complete transparency and accountability" and said the new fund was "separate from the original family support fund to eliminate any confusion regarding the purpose and use of donations."
That page has since been unpublished. Whether GiveSendGo pulled it or the organizer took it down is unclear.
Fox News also reported that Anthony's family registered a Texas business less than a month after Metcalf's death. The name and stated purpose of that business have not been disclosed in available reporting. Anthony's parents have not been accused of wrongdoing.
But the financial picture raises obvious questions. More than $630,000 flowed into a campaign billed primarily as a legal defense fund. The money was disbursed. And now the defendant tells a court he has nothing, not a dime, to pay for a lawyer.
A judge will have to decide whether Anthony qualifies for a court-appointed attorney. The New York Post reported that the court will need to determine how to factor in the crowdfunding money when evaluating the indigency claim. Defense attorney Mike Howard told the Post there are "several important issues for the appellate courts to consider" and called the appeal "the next part of the legal process and a right afforded every American."
That's true as far as it goes. Every convicted defendant has a right to appeal. The question is whether taxpayers should pick up the tab when six figures in donated money, raised for exactly this purpose, have already changed hands.
The stabbing that started all of this occurred on April 2, 2025, at a track meet in Frisco, Texas. Austin Metcalf, 17, was killed. Anthony was arrested and charged with murder.
At trial, the Washington Examiner reported, multiple students testified that Metcalf told Anthony to leave his team's tent before Anthony retrieved a knife from a bag. The defense argued self-defense, with attorney Michael Howard telling the jury that Metcalf "had no legal right to use force to eject Karmelo Anthony from that tent." Anthony did not testify in his own defense.
The jury rejected the self-defense claim. Judge John Roach Jr. had instructed jurors they could also consider a lesser manslaughter charge, as Breitbart reported, but the panel returned a first-degree murder verdict. Anthony was sentenced to 35 years in prison.
The case drew national attention in part because of social media posts emphasizing the racial backgrounds of those involved, though both the prosecution and defense maintained that race played no role in the incident.
What remains unresolved is where the money went. Donors who gave to the original GiveSendGo campaign were told the bulk of their contributions would fund Anthony's legal defense. The platform confirmed the funds were disbursed. Yet Anthony now tells a judge he cannot afford a lawyer.
There is no public accounting, at least none disclosed in available reporting, showing how the $630,000 was spent. Did the trial-level defense team receive a portion? How much went to relocation and living expenses? Was any set aside for an appeal? None of these questions have been answered publicly.
Courts across the country face difficult decisions about indigency claims, and the broader landscape of how courts handle criminal defendants continues to evolve. But this case presents an unusually stark set of facts. A defendant whose supporters raised more than half a million dollars, in a campaign explicitly marketed as a legal defense fund, now asks the state to treat him as if he has nothing.
The Texas court system, which has faced its own share of scrutiny, from a Texas judge permanently banned from the bench to broader questions about judicial accountability nationwide, will now have to weigh whether Anthony's claim of poverty holds up against the financial record.
If the court grants the request without pressing hard on where those donations landed, it will send a clear message: crowdfund your defense, spend the money however you like, then hand the bill to taxpayers when it's time to appeal.
Meanwhile, Austin Metcalf's family buries a 17-year-old and watches a convicted killer's supporters work every angle of the system. Due process is a right. Making the public pay for it after your supporters already did, that's something else entirely.
