Double jeopardy protections preclude retrial of a premeditation and deliberation allegation after an appellate finding of insufficient evidence. In People v. Bright (1996) 12 Cal.4th 652, the California Supreme Court held that a finding under Penal Code section 664(a) was a penalty provision and not subject to double jeopardy protections. Following the holding in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, the court in this case reversed its decision in Bright. The court noted the differences between a prior conviction allegation and an allegation of premeditation and deliberation, noting that the latter is akin to an element of the offense, and is thus the proper subject of double jeopardy protections.