Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / courts / Harold Fish wins another legal battle over 2004 killing

Harold Fish wins another legal battle over 2004 killing

The Arizona Supreme Court on Dec. 1 delivered the third legal victory for West Valley resident Harold Fish, who garnered national attention and a 10-year sentence for his fatal shooting of a man on a northern Arizona hiking trail.

On Dec. 1, the court declined to consider an appeal filed by the Attorney General’s Office that sought to reverse an appellate court decision that ordered Fish to receive a new trial in Coconino County for shooting and killing Grant Kuenzli. Reversing the order for a new trial would have meant that Fish’s murder conviction still was in effect.

Fish and Kuenzli crossed paths on a Coconino County trail on May 11, 2004, and Fish has maintained he acted in self-defense when he shot Kuenzli three times in the chest at close range. He said Kuenzli charged him in a threatening manner after he fired a warning shot to deter Kuenzli’s aggressive dogs.

The retired teacher was later convicted of second-degree murder and spent more than three years in prison before the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed his conviction in June. In a unanimous decision, the panel awarded Fish a new trial because he was not allowed to present evidence that showed Kuenzli was mentally unstable and violent.

Prosecutors with the Coconino County Attorney’s Office contended Kuenzli’s past was largely irrelevant and inadmissible at trial, as Fish would have been unaware of the man’s tendencies or character at the time of the shooting.
The Court of Appeals’ decision followed a significant victory for Fish that occurred in July, when Gov. Jan Brewer signed legislation that made changes in Arizona’s self-defense laws retroactive in order to apply to Fish’s case.

Fish said the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision to avoid considering the Attorney General’s appeal provided some comfort that his ordeal is over.

“I never felt I was guilty and felt that I was never able to communicate that in a way the system would understand,” he said. “We tried and tried, but they just didn’t want to hear what really happened. Once they (Coconino Attorney’s Office) got it into their mind they wanted to pursue a conviction, then no amount of reason or truth would deter them.”

Following the appellate decision in June, the Coconino County Attorney’s Office announced it would not seek a retrial of Fish if the appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court was unsuccessful. The office cited a lack of evidence and witnesses to the shooting.

The Attorney General’s Office sought a reversal of the appellate decision, which the office claimed disregarded existing case law that forbids defendants from presenting damaging evidence against victims.

Kent Cattani, chief of criminal appeals for Attorney General Terry Goddard, said the appellate opinion could “open the doors” to allowing victims’ characters to be examined when character information is simply not relevant to a case.

Still, Cattani said it’s unlikely that the Attorney General’s Office will ask the Arizona Supreme Court to reconsider its decision.


  1. We have to get rid of Goddard. He is to anti self defense and anti gun. To bad I can’t help get him out of office trouble is i’m in Yavapai County. You people who believe in the right of self-defense and the 2nd amendment know what you have to do. Good luck

  2. This has nothing to do with “character information.” If the crime victim reports the attacker was a raving lunatic and a dozen unrelated people can verify that kind of behavior, it supports the victim’s characterization. We are not talking about dragging in past misbehavior just for the sake of muddying the waters. If the many stories of the Duke U rape “victim” had been revealed, the value of her testimony would have been reduced. If her past inaccurate charges had been made known, the case would not have been persecuted/prosecuted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *




Check Also

Republicans file 2 lawsuits challenging redistricting maps (access required)

Republican critics of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission will file two lawsuits that seek to force the redrawing of the commission’s approved legislative and congressional districts.