With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". protections. In response, the State first contends appellant waived the right to assert a double jeopardy argument on appeal. The general rule is that a plea of guilty precludes a later attack on appellant’s conviction and/or sentence premised on double jeopardy grounds. United States v. Broce, 488 U.S. 563, 569, 109 S.Ct. 757, 102 L.Ed.2d 927 (1989). -However, there is an exception to this general rule when (1) the entered plea was a general plea as distinguished from a bargained plea; (2) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the face of the record; and (3) the record does not indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation. Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla.1994). A “straight up” or “open plea” does not amount to a bargained for plea. Williamson v. S DCA 1992) (<HOLDING>). Further, section 893.03(2)(a)(4), Florida

A: holding that when two underlying offenses are charged in an indictment for capital murder the state need only prove one of the two offenses to support the conviction
B: holding unanimity requirement not violated when charge stated two separate counts with two separate and distinct offenses in each case
C: holding that after making an arrest of the driver of a vehicle the police may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle
D: holding that a defendant may not be charged with two separate offenses premised on two amounts of cocaine one found in a box and one found in a bag located in the passenger compartment of the defendants vehicle
D.