Final answer:
The statement that appellate courts review trial court decisions and can reverse or modify them if prejudicial errors are found is TRUE. Appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, play a critical role in maintaining the integrity of the judicial system through judicial review.
Step-by-step explanation:
Appellate courts indeed have the authority to engage in judicial review, assessing whether errors occurred during the trial with the power to reverse or modify the decisions of trial courts. The statement is TRUE: an appeal is typically unsuccessful unless the appellant can demonstrate that prejudicial legal errors affected the trial's outcome. High courts, like the U.S. Supreme Court, exercise appellate jurisdiction in most circumstances, hearing cases on appeal after they have been decided by lower courts. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court can invoke judicial review to potentially overturn laws or actions by Congress and the Executive Branch that are deemed unconstitutional, which demonstrates not only their appellate power but also their influence on the legal framework.
Cases can ascend to the supreme federal level from lower courts if a writ of certiorari is granted, which four of the nine Supreme Court justices must agree to. This level of review emphasizes the principle of the three-tiered structure of the federal courts, ensuring the consistent application of the law and upholding constitutional principles. Judicial review, as solidified in the landmark case Marbury vs. Madison, is a testament to the judiciary's essential role in the system of checks and balances, although it's an authority exercised with considerable restraint over the history of the Court.