In Barnett v. State, 83 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2002, no pet.), the Court held that a double jeopardy violation was apparent from the face of the record. There, the first trial ended in a mistrial granted at the defendant's request after the prosecutor, having been repeatedly warned and admonished, offered into evidence materials he was expressly instructed not to mention. Id. at 812-13. After dismissing the first jury, the trial court immediately summoned another venire and proceeded with the retrial. Id. at 813. The Court held that "successive petition" claims are sufficiently apparent from the record to have violated the double jeopardy clause to be adequately raised and considered on the merits on appeal. Id.