Nationwide — Legal experts say Karmelo Anthony’s 35-year Texas conviction could most strongly be challenged on appeal due to how the jury was selected. They point to the absence of Black jurors in a case where prosecutors struck three Black women during selection.
The jury process in Collin County began with about 589 residents. It was narrowed down to 12 jurors and six alternates, with no Black jurors seated. The county is more than 10 percent Black, which has raised questions about how the final panel was formed in Anthony’s trial.
During selection, prosecutors removed three Black women who worked as educators. They argued that their profession could affect impartiality in a case involving a school-related incident. However, all three had stated they could remain fair when evaluating the evidence, according to Atlanta Black Star.
Anthony’s defense team challenged the removals through a Batson challenge, which addresses racial bias in jury selection. The judge rejected the challenge after prosecutors said their strikes were based on occupation, not race. Legal experts say this reasoning may be examined more closely on appeal, especially if similar non-Black educators were allowed to stay on the jury.
Some attorneys also compared the process to Arizona, where peremptory strikes are no longer allowed. In that system, lawyers must give stronger, case-specific reasons to remove jurors, which can make it harder to exclude candidates like educators without clear bias concerns.
Attention has also turned to Anthony’s 35-year sentence. Legal analysts say appellate courts often review whether punishment aligns with similar cases, particularly when the defendant is young and has no significant prior criminal history.
“Thirty-five years is the type of sentence you might expect for someone with prior felony convictions or a long record, maybe someone older,” said Benjamin Taylor, a civil rights and criminal defense attorney. “By contrast, from what we know, this appears to be Karmelo Anthony’s first serious offense, and he’s relatively young,” Taylor continued.
Anthony’s defense team also opted for jury sentencing, a choice allowed in Texas but made before jury selection. Legal experts say that the decision likely assumed a more balanced jury pool. Some also argue that a more diverse jury could have influenced both the verdict and the sentencing outcome.