An attorney argued before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on July 23 that a convicted homicide defendant’s sentence should be reversed because his previous defense failed to argue he was intoxicated during the murder.
Idrissa Fall, 39, was convicted of first-degree premeditated murder while armed in a bias-related hate crime, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction less than one year. The charges stem from his involvement in the fatal shooting of his ex-girlfriend, 29 year-old Dara Northern, on the 6100 block of 4th Street, NW on July 18, 2021. Northern was shot once in the head. Fall was sentenced in May 2025 to 50 years imprisonment across these three charges.
According to court documents, Fall and Northern broke up days before the shooting. In Fall’s trial, prosecutors argued the motivation for the shooting stemmed from his perception that Northern may have been part of the LGBTQ+ community.
In court, Fall’s attorney, Peter Meyers, argued that Fall was “blackout” the night of the murder, and his previous counsel, attorney Wole Falodun, failed to pursue this defense during the trial when he should have. Meyers filed a motion to vacate Fall’s conviction on grounds of ineffective representation by Falodun.
Judge Brandt explained to parties and Northern’s family that she will have a decision by Aug. 14.
Fall testified during the hearing that on the night of Northern’s death, he took Molly (MDMA,a powerful hallucinogen), about three-and-a-half ounces of cocaine, and three narcotic, pain-killing percocets, as well as drinking full bottles of red wine and Hennessy, cognac
“I was high, I was way too high,” Fall said in his testimony, “I was wasted, I was tripping.”
In Fall’s cross-examination, the prosecution played a video of an interview with Fall and two detectives conducted a month after Northern’s death, in which he said that he was not “so intoxicated.” In the video, he attested to drinking four small glasses of wine and a shot of Hennessy, bottles he shared with three other friends.
Fall admitted on the stand to changing his account of how much he drank in between that interview and the hearing, but claimed that his current testimony was the most accurate. He also alleged he was intoxicated during the interview.
Meyers pointed out that the detectives did not believe much of Fall’s interview because they said “you’ve been lying to us this entire time” in the video.
Falodun, Fall’s attorney during the trial, also testified.
The prosecution asked Falodun why he did not consider an intoxication defense, to which he replied that Fall “advised there was an individual that fired the gun that ultimately killed Ms. Northern.” Falodun said that arguing an intoxication defense in addition to claiming a third party was responsible for the murder “would be a contradictory defense.”
“[Fall] never deviated,” Falodun said. “He always maintained that someone else did it.”
According to Fall, an African-American man with dreadlocks standing a distance away shot Northern.
Falodun also repeatedly asserted that he was aware about Fall’s substance abuse challenges leading up to the trial, but only recalls being told that Fall drank some alcohol the night of the murder.
In cross-examination, Meyers asked Falodun if he knew about the quantity of substances Fall took before the incident and if he had any mention of intoxication in his notes from discussions with Fall, to which Falodun said he was not sure.
Meyers discussed Falodun’s familiarity with substance-induced blackouts and asked “could a blackout have prevented [Fall] from remembering he killed Ms. Northern?”
Falodun said he was familiar with blackouts but claimed that he had no reason to believe Fall was incapacitated at any time surrounding the incident.
“Based on the evidence that was available to me, there was no indication of that,” Falodun said.
Meyers also questioned comments from an eyewitness who allegedly told Fall “You’re tripping” twice on the scene. Meyers argued that the statement was related to Fall’s substance use, while the prosecution argued that it was due to the eyewitness’ annoyance with his misbehavior.
Falodun contended that “context matters,” when it came to that statement and that the eyewitness made the comment as an offensive jab during an argument.
Meyers also noted that Northern’s mother called Fall an alcoholic when she testified in front of a grand jury in September 2021.
In his argument, Meyers claimed that Fall’s intoxication was indisputable. He said that his substance use on the night of the incident could have led him to suffer a blackout preventing him from remembering the shooting. As a result, he requested that the conviction be overturned.
The prosecution described Judge Brandt’s decision as a debate of credibility between Fall and Falodun. They argued that Fall’s testimony should have little weight.
The prosecution questioned, “Which version of Mr. Fall are we going to believe?”
The prosecution claimed that Falodun, a “very accomplished, very well respected defense attorney,” was a more credible source in comparison. They argued that the manner and length of time needed to establish intoxication was not explained by Fall and little evidence was provided proving incapacitation. The prosecution requested that the motion be denied.
Meyers noted that the case’s direct appeal is pending in the DC Court of Appeals.
No further dates were set.
