The case of Christopher A. Lopez v. Randy J. Davis, Warden, et al., 2000 revolves around the issue of whether a prisoner's appeal should be dismissed due to it being filed late because he was not informed about the final judgement on his case by prison officials in time to meet the deadline for filing an appeal. The Supreme Court ruled that if a prisoner is not notified about a judgment against him or her and therefore misses the deadline for filing an appeal through no fault of their own, then this does constitute grounds for equitable tolling (a pause or delay in the running of the period) under federal law which allows them to file their appeal after all.

In the dissenting opinion for Christopher A. Lopez v. Randy J. Davis, Warden, et al., the justice argued that there was a failure to properly apply federal law in relation to ineffective assistance of counsel claims and this resulted in an unfair decision against Lopez. The justice believed that the lower court had incorrectly evaluated whether or not defense counsel's performance was deficient and if it prejudiced the defendant’s case as required by Strickland v Washington (1984). They also disagreed with how prejudice was determined, arguing that it should be based on whether there is a reasonable probability of a different outcome rather than certainty of acquittal without attorney errors. Furthermore, they felt that evidence suggesting guilt does not automatically negate any potential impact from legal representation failures; thus concluding that these issues warranted further examination at an evidentiary hearing which wasn't granted by lower courts.