In Bauder v. State, 921 S.W.2d 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) the Court held that. . . a successive prosecution is jeopardy barred under the Texas Constitution after declaration of a mistrial at the defendant's request, not only when the objectionable conduct of the prosecutor was intended to induce a motion for mistrial, the Fifth Amendment standard under Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667, 72 L. Ed. 2d 416, 102 S. Ct. 2083 (1982), but also when the prosecutor was aware but consciously disregarded the risk that an objectionable event for which he was responsible would require a mistrial at the defendant's request. Bauder, 921 S.W.2d at 699. In Bauder v. State, the Court held for the first time that a prosecutor need not intend to goad defense counsel into moving for a mistrial for double jeopardy to bar a retrial. The Court said that retrial will also be prohibited "when the prosecutor was aware but consciously disregarded the risk that an objectionable event for which he was responsible would require a mistrial at the defendant's request." So jeopardy consequences under Bauder attach to reckless or grossly negligent prosecutorial conduct as well as intentional behavior.