Is there double jeopardy between a state and federal criminal proceedings?

Rockstad complains that the federal proceedings leading to his incarceration constituted double jeopardy, and therefore violated his fifth amendment rights. ¹ He bases this claim on a bungled state prosecution for arson. After the state case failed, federal authorities prosecuted Rockstad for mail fraud and conspiracy. Although the "dual sovereigns" doctrine ordinarily would preclude any claim of double jeopardy under these circumstances, see Bartkus v. Illinois, 359 U.S. 121, 131-32 (1959), Rockstad contends that the "sham prosecution" exception applies such that both prosecutions were really brought by the same sovereign. Cf. id. at 124 (discussing state proceedings that followed a federal prosecution).