"The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and article I, section 9 of the Florida Constitution protects an accused against being twice put in jeopardy for the same offense." State v. Gaines, 770 So. 2d 1221, 1225 (Fla. 2000) (citing Thomason v. State, 620 So. 2d 1234, 1236 (Fla. 1993)). In United States v. Dinitz, 424 U.S. 600, 96 S. Ct. 1075, 47 L. Ed. 2d 267 (1975), the United States States Supreme Court explained the importance of the Double Jeopardy Clause: The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment protects a defendant in a criminal proceeding against multiple punishments or repeated prosecutions for the same offense. See United States v. Wilson, 420 U.S. 332, 343, 95 S. Ct. 1013, 43 L. Ed. 2d 232 (1975); North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 717, 89 S. Ct. 2072, 23 L. Ed. 2d 656 (1969). Underlying this constitutional safeguard is the belief that "the State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity, as well as enhancing the possibility that even though innocent he may be found guilty." Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 187-188, 78 S. Ct. 221, 2 L. Ed. 2d 199, 77 Ohio Law Abs. 202 (1957). Id. at 606. Jeopardy attaches when the jury is impaneled and sworn. See Gaines, 770 So. 2d at 1225. However, not every mistrial declared after jeopardy attaches invokes the protections of the Double Jeopardy Clause. If a mistrial is the product of "manifest necessity" or is declared at the voluntary request of a defendant, a retrial will not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. See Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667, 672, 102 S. Ct. 2083, 72 L. Ed. 2d 416 (1982).